Preamble

The House met at Half past Two o'Clock

PRAYERS

[Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair]

Another Member took and subscribed the Oath.

PRIVATE BUSINESS

NORTH WALES HYDRO-ELECTRIC POWER BILL (By Order)

ROCHESTER CORPORATION BILL (By Order)

Second Reading deferred till Tuesday next.

Oral Answers to Questions — MINISTRY OF WORKS

South Bank (Riverside Walk)

Lieut.-Colonel Marcus Lipton: asked the Minister of Works whether he will open the riverside walk and restaurant facilities on the South Bank to the public this summer until the expiry of the lease.

The Minister of Works (Mr. David Eccles): The riverside walk belongs to the London County Council and I am about to hand it back to them. Any inquiries should be addressed to the Council.

Lieut.-Colonel Lipton: Can the Minister give an assurance that he will do all within his power to encourage the praiseworthy efforts of the L.C.C. to make this attractive amenity available to the public as quickly as possible?

Mr. Eccles: Yes, Sir.

British Council Offices

Lieut.-Colonel Lipton: asked the Minister of Works how much is being spent to provide a separate entrance to the offices of the British Council in the Government premises at New Oxford Street, London; and how long these alterations will take to complete.

Mr. Eccles: Thirty-five pounds were spent on removing bricks from the back entrance of these premises in order to comply with fire regulations and make an opening wide enough to take in display stands. The work was done in four days. Similar work is desirable to provide better access at the front entrance and may be undertaken if conditions permit.

Lieut.-Colonel Lipton: Does that answer mean that the Minister has not yet made up his mind to carry out the additional work in the front? Is there any reason why the staff of the British Council cannot use the same entrance as other inhabitants of this building?

Mr. Eccles: It is desirable to do this work and also to provide better access for these inhabitants and better escape in case of fire. As it costs money, I have not yet made up my mind.

Requisitioned Premises

Lieut.-Colonel Sir Thomas Moore: asked the Minister of Works what plans he has in mind for a general de-requisitioning of privately owned buildings still occupied by Government Departments, particularly in the town of Ayr.

Mr. Eccles: Special efforts are being made by all Government Departments to economise in the use of accommodation in order to release more requisitioned premises. In the town of Ayr there are only two private houses now held on requisition but, owing to the ban on new office building, a scheme which would have ensured their release has had to be abandoned. I shall continue my efforts to find alternative accommodation.

Sir T. Moore: While thanking my right hon. Friend, may I ask whether he appreciates that there is a natural and understandable resentment by private traders and others when they see their premises still occupied by Government Departments six years after the end of the war? Will he do as much as he can quickly to free all these requisitioned premises?

Mr. Eccles: I appreciate that and am doing all that I can.

Mr. Emrys Hughes: Is the Minister aware of the strong feeling in Ayr that the barracks should be de-requisitioned and utilised for housing purposes.

Lewis's, Liverpool (Building Licence)

Mrs. E. M. Braddock: asked the Minister of Works how many tradesmen are working on Lewis's extension in Liverpool; when permission was given by his Department to move quantities of steel, allowed for building in Manchester by the same firm, to be used on the Liverpool site; and why this firm have not been included in the building standstill order.

Mr. Eccles: The work on Lewis's at Liverpool is not an extension but a reconstruction of a war-damaged building. On 29th February, 64 building trades craftsmen were employed on the site. The use of steel from Lewis's unfinished prewar building at Manchester was authorised in April, 1949. The deferment of starting dates does not apply to work in progress.

Mrs. Braddock: Is the Minister aware that it is very difficult to convince people that there is a shortage of steel when one looks at the progress of Lewis's in Liverpool? Is he also aware that the steel which is being used has been transferred from a similar project in Manchester which seems to have been abandoned? Is it right what people in Liverpool are saying, that if one happens to be Chairman of the Conservative Party one has no difficulty in obtaining steel?

Mr. Eccles: The transfer of the steel was authorised by the late Government. I assume that, like some of her hon. Friends, the hon. Lady is "having a go" at her own Front Bench.

Mrs. Braddock: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there was supposed to be a standstill order—[HON. MEMBERS: "Only on new building."]—and that it does not seem to have applied to this firm? Following the decision to suspend work on schemes, even though permission for the work had been given by the previous Government, is it not the case that very many such projects were stopped and that practically the only one in Liverpool which has not been stopped is the one where the managing director is Chairman of the Conservative Party?

Mr. Eccles: The hon. Lady is quite wrong. The standstill order did not apply to work in progress. It would have been very uneconomical to stop work on buildings which were already going up.

Hedgerows, St. James's Park

Mr. Gerald Nabarro: asked the Minister of Works what representations he has received about the future of the young hedgerows around St. James's Park; and if he will give an assurance that he will resist proposals to grub them up.

Mr. John Tilney: asked the Minister of Works if he will consider removing the unsightly yew hedge that surrounds St. James's Park.

Mr. Eccles: While I have received no official representations about this hedge, I am aware that there is considerable feeling for and against it. I am anxious to test public opinion further before taking any action.
One of the principles of laying out a park is to make a given space appear larger than it is. In my opinion the hedge breaks this principle by interrupting the view of the grass and lake. If it were grubbed up, I should have to provide a robust fence.

Mr. Nabarro: Why does my right hon. Friend continue to equivocate in this matter? Does his reply mean that his policy will be to continue the hedge or otherwise?

Mr. Eccles: I want to give public opinion a further chance to express itself.

Mr. Tilney: Is my right hon. Friend aware that, although these trees, which are out of keeping with our tradition, have since the war been endeavouring to shut in the natural grandeur of one of the loveliest of parks, these rows of yew are now bedraggled, unkempt and frequently split, and lack all formal unity?

King William III Statue

Professor Sir Douglas Savory: asked the Minister of Works whether he will make arrangements to render the statue of King William III accessible to the public at least on 12th July and 5th November, as at present this statue in St. James's Square is surrounded by a fence with locked doors so that it cannot be seen except at a distance.

Mr. Eccles: Access to this admirable statue is controlled by the Trustees of St. James's Square. My responsibility is limited to the maintenance of the statue under the provisions of the Public Statues Act, 1854.

Sir D. Savory: Will my right hon. Friend do his best to prevent his sacred Majesty of blessed memory from being isolated in a sort of German concentration camp?

Mr. Eccles: I have a suggestion to make to my hon. Friend. The Minister of Labour has in his keeping a key to this garden and, with his sincerity, my hon. Friend might move the Minister to lend him the key.

Mr. Leslie Hale: In the interests of peace across the water, will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance to the House that he will provide similar amenities and facilities for his late most gracious Majesty King James II?

New Garage, Manchester (Building Licence)

Mr. W. Nally: asked the Minister of Works if he will cause an investigation to be made into the circumstances under which a licence or licences were approved enabling a garage and other buildings, valued at £7,000, to be built upon a site in Moston Lane, Blackley, Manchester.

Mr. Eccles: Two licences, for £160 and £1,475 respectively, were issued by my Department last year for work at this site. The smaller licence was for the installation of petrol pumps. The larger licence was for the erection of a garage and was granted on the sponsorship of the Ministry of Transport.

Mr. Nally: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that throughout the whole of this suburb there is a justifiable belief, held irrespective of party politics, that, although the original transaction was during the time of the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor, from beginning to end this has been a highly dubious transaction which needs further investigation? If I provide the right hon. Gentleman with further information, will he take steps to see that trained investigating officers of his Department go into the whole of the unhappy circumstances?

Mr. Eccles: I am not aware of that. In any case, the responsibility lies with the Ministry of Transport, who said that the garage was necessary, and I have every reason to believe that it was.

Mr. Eric Johnson: Will my right hon. Friend also be prepared to receive figures, with which I will furnish him, to

show that the amount of £7,000 is merely a product of the fertile imagination of the hon. Member for Bilston (Mr. Nally)?

Mr. Nally: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that is exactly the point that we are anxious to establish? Is he aware that one of the leading Tory elders in Blackley, who is well known to the hon. Gentleman, personally assures me that the work could not possibly have been done under £7,000?

Brick Production

Mr. William Shepherd: asked the Minister of Works if he is satisfied that the production of bricks is sufficient to meet the needs of the housing programme.

Mr. Eccles: Yes, Sir. I am satisfied with the position at the end of January. I hope that the increase in output will continue and be sufficient for the expanding housing programme and other essential needs.

Field-Marshal Smuts (Memorial)

Mr. W. Shepherd: asked the Minister of Works what progress has been made towards the erection of a statue to the late Field-Marshal Smuts.

Mr. Eccles: A Resolution will shortly be laid before the House to consider an humble Address to Her Majesty praying for directions to erect the Memorial. I am glad to inform the House that Lord Harlech has agreed to preside over the Selection Committee and that the Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of the Liberal Party have also agreed to serve on this Committee.

Dome of Discovery

Mr. Norman Dodds: asked the Minister of Works what action has been taken to get the best possible price for the Dome of Discovery.

Mr. Eccles: When finally the London County Council decided not to re-erect the Dome, competitive tenders were invited for its demolition. In this way the best price will be secured consistent with the need to clear one of the finest sites in the world in readiness for next year's celebrations.

Mr. G. R. Strauss: Is it not a fact that all the London County Council have decided is that they cannot re-erect it at


the moment without further consideration? Even at this stage, would not the right hon. Gentleman consider going further into the matter of preserving this magnificent building for London, where it could be used for a series of entertainments and exhibitions for the benefit of the people of London?

Mr. Eccles: No, Sir. A time comes when one must make a decision if the site is to be cleared, as I am certain the majority of the people of London want it to be.

Christies', St. James' (Rebuilding)

Mr. Martin Lindsay: asked the Minister of Works for what purpose the large constructional work between Duke Street and King Street, St. James', is being undertaken; and what is the value of the licence granted.

Mr. Eccles: I assume that my hon. Friend is referring to Christies' premises at 8, King Street, St. James', where the auction galleries, store-rooms and offices are being rebuilt after war damage. A licence for £205,625 was granted in May, 1951, for this work.

Building Materials (Price Control Removal)

Mr. Gilbert Longden: asked the Minister of Works what changes there have recently been in the price control arrangements for the building materials for which his Department is the production Department.

Squadron Leader A. E. Cooper: asked the Minister of Works what changes in prices for building materials controlled by his Department are contemplated; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Eccles: Yes, Sir. I was anxious to remove price controls where they have outlived their usefulness, and therefore have consulted the producers of building materials concerned.
Most of these industries would have been granted increases of price to cover increased costs of coal, freight, raw materials, etc. They have now given assurances that they will keep such increases to a minimum and will establish prices which will remain firm during 1952 unless there are further major increases in cost.
On the basis of these assurances I have removed price control from plasterboard, Gypsum rock, building plasters, sanitary fireclay, asbestos cement, lead sheet and pipe, sanitary earthenware, cement (ordinary Portland and rapid hardening), and certain types of flat glass.

Mr. Longden: Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House what saving of manpower this will entail?

Mr. Eccles: It will entail savings, but I need notice of that question to give any hon. Friend an accurate answer.

Squadron Leader Cooper: Whilst thanking my right hon. Friend for this encouraging statement, may I ask him to tell the House whether metal windows and like fittings are included in this de-control?

Mr. Eccles: No, Sir; only the materials I mentioned.

Mr. E. Shinwell: Before removing price control, did the Minister ascertain whether there was a plentiful supply of these materials and whether in future there would be a plentiful supply?

Mr. Eccles: Yes, that was one of the considerations.

Mr. C. W. Gibson: In view of the statement in "The Times" recently that the cost of house-building materials had risen by 25 per cent. during the last 12 months, does not the Minister think that he has taken a dangerous step? Ought we not rather to make sure by controls that these prices are kept down in the interests of cheaper house building?

Mr. Eccles: Under the old system I should have had to grant increases at least equal to those which have taken place. My own view is that the supply of these articles is more likely to come forward when the industries are freer.

Mr. George Brown: But is not the right hon. Gentleman aware, on the information of his own Department, that a great struggle has gone on to keep the rate of profit in the industries he has mentioned down to anything like a reasonable figure over the last few years? Plasterboard supplies are controlled by the supply of raw material, particularly paper. How can he assure the House that there will be a sufficient increase in


supply to prevent the rate of profit rising as it would have done but for the voluntary price control?

Mr. Eccles: Delivery dates for plasterboard, when I took office, were anything up to six months and are now down to immediate supply.

Mr. Frederick Mulley: Will the Minister give the House an assurance that if the prices of these materials are put up beyond a reasonable amount because of increased costs—if, for instance, the plasterboard people do what they did last year and break a voluntary agreement—will he take steps immediately to re-impose price control?

Mr. Eccles: I shall watch the situation, but I have confidence that these industries will conduct their affairs with responsibility.

Mr. Brown: May I ask the Minister whether he is being fair with the House in saying that the delivery date was six months when he took office, since the general ban on building which he has now imposed was not there? How will he ensure that there will be ample supplies when he re-opens the building programme properly, or does he never intend to make the supplies match the real programme?

Mr. Eccles: When the right hon. Gentleman was in office he failed to secure adequate supplies of paper liner for the plasterboard industry. I have now secured those supplies and the situation is easier.

Oral Answers to Questions — PALACE OF WESTMINSTER

Mr. Nabarro: asked the Minister of Works the current annual rate of coal consumption of the Palace of Westminster, including the coal equivalent for gas and electricity consumed in the buildings and precincts of the Palace; how this figure for 1952 compares with earlier years; and what steps are in hand to improve heat, light and power arrangements at the Palace of Westminster, with a view to coal conservation and efficient utilisation.

Mr. Eccles: The total consumption of coal, and the equivalent in coal of gas and electricity and fuel oil in 1951 was 4,771 tons. This compares with an

average of 2,849 tons for the five years before the new boiler house came into use in 1950.
The increased consumption is due to the additional accommodation, and amenities mostly in the new House of Commons.
The domestic hot water system will shortly be connected to the new plant, and the separate boiler closed down. Insulation of steam and hot water pipes is nearly complete. These measures should result in increased efficiency and the working of the system will be carefully watched to ensure all practicable economies.

Mr. Nabarro: Is my right hon. Friend seized of the importance of coal conservation and fuel efficiency in these matters, and should not the House of Commons set an example? Can he assure the House that he is looking to his boilers and his steam raisers?

Mr. Eccles: Yes, Sir. This boiler was installed before I came into office.

Mr. Walter Fletcher: Will my right hon. Friend take great care to see that the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro) does not set the Thames on fire?

Oral Answers to Questions — EMPLOYMENT

Macclesfield

Air Commodore A. V. Harvey: asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware of the increasing unemployment in Macclesfield; and if he will discuss with his right hon. Friends the possibility of bringing other industries into the district.

The Minister of Labour (Sir Walter Monckton): Yes, Sir. I am in touch with my right hon. Friends about the employment position in Macclesfield and other areas similarly affected.

Air Commodore Harvey: Will my right hon. and learned Friend consult his right hon. Friend the Minister of Supply and send officers to Macclesfield as soon as possible, because the unemployment there has been building up steadily since last June.

Sir W. Monckton: Macclesfield is one of those places where there is considerable unemployment in the textile


and clothing industries, and in my judgment it is too soon at the moment to judge what the pattern of that industry will be and what the level of employment will settle at. However, I am keeping this closely in mind and am in touch with my right hon. Friend whose province covers it more nearly than mine.

Mr. Shinwell: Yes, but if the right hon. and learned Gentleman has consulted his right hon. Friend, what does his right hon. Friend intend to do about it?

Sir W. Monckton: I think the answer to that is that my right hon. Friend, like myself, will want to take into account some things of which we are at the moment not fully aware. For instance, one is the situation in Australia, and perhaps we might hear something later in the day which we ought to take into account.

Skilled Engineers, Coventry

Miss Elaine Burton: asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that skilled engineers in the motor industry in Coventry are finding it impossible to obtain alternative employment where their skill may be used to the best advantage, either in the motor industry or the defence programme; and what steps he proposes to take to remedy this situation.

Sir W. Monckton: The demand for skilled engineers in Coventry greatly exceeds the supply and in general the only types of skilled engineering workers for whom suitable alternative employment in their own trade is not always immediately available locally are skilled sheet metal workers and coach body-workers. The employment exchange is continuing its efforts to place the workers affected in suitable employment.

Miss Burton: The right hon. and learned Gentleman is, of course, quite right. Is he aware that in Coventry many men in the National Union of Vehicle Builders cannot obtain alternative skilled employment, and will his officials confer very carefully with the union?

Sir W. Monckton: Yes, Sir, certainly.

Coalmining (Recruitment Poster)

Mr. James Simmons: asked the Minister of Labour, in view of the fact that an adequate supply of labour in the brickmaking industry is essential to the housing programme, why his Department is encouraging brickworkers to go into the coal mines.

Sir W. Monckton: This is not the policy of my Department. I presume that the hon. Member is referring to an unfortunately worded advertisement, which has now been withdrawn.

Load Spreading

Mr. R. Ewart: asked the Minister of Labour to what extent the policy of load spreading in the north-east industry has resulted in a saving of man-hours over the present winter months; and how this compares with previous winter man-hours and production.

Sir W. Monckton: I am making inquiries to see whether this information is available and will communicate with the hon. Member.

Sunderland

Mr. Frederick Willey: asked the Minister of Labour what steps are being taken to secure employment for the large number of severely disabled persons in Sunderland at present unemployed.

Sir W. Monckton: Remploy, Limited, hope to provide employment in their factory at Pallion during 1952 for a few more of the 117 severely disabled unemployed persons in Sunderland. My local officers are also making continuous efforts to obtain suitable work for all unemployed disabled persons, including the severely disabled, and are receiving valuable help from the Sunderland Disablement Advisory Committee in obtaining the co-operation of local employers.

Mr. Willey: Would the right hon. and learned Gentleman not agree that the only course to take, in view of the large number of severely disabled in Sunderland, is to proceed with the building of another Remploy factory?

Sir W. Monckton: No, Sir. I am not satisfied that the moment has come for that.

Mr. F. Willey: asked the Minister of Labour how many workers in Sunderland are working short time.

Sir W. Monckton: This precise information is not available, but at 11th February there were 168 persons registered as unemployed at employment exchanges in Sunderland who were not at work on that day on account of short-time or other temporary stoppages.

Hayes and Harlington

Mr. W. H. Ayles: asked the Minister of Labour the number of unemployed and the number on short-time in Hayes and Harlington, Middlesex, on the last convenient date.

Sir W. Monckton: One hundred and eighty-eight on 11th February, 1952, of whom three were not at work on that day on account of short-time or other temporary stoppages.

Mr. Ayles: Is the Minister aware that last Friday the E.M.I. discharged 500 men and that next week they are to discharge over 200? Will he consult with his right hon. Friend the Minister of Supply with a view to re-opening the Royal Ordnance Factory in Hayes, which at present is on

1. The number of persons of foreign nationality admitted to this country to take up employment is available only for those recruited under official schemes.


2. In addition, records are maintained of the number of individual permits issued to employers in respect of foreign workers abroad to enable them to take employment in this country. Statistics are not maintained to show the numbers actually arriving.


3. A number of foreign visitors or students have been granted permission to take up employment after entering the country.


4. The following Table gives the figures in each category.


Category
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951


(a) Number of Foreign workers recruited under official schemes
37,594
40,225
8,661
4,728
2,613


(b) Number of individual permits issued to employers
27,002
28,460
35,226
35,035
36,570


(c)Number of visitors or students permitted to take up employment
2,615
2,740
2,781
2,781
3,040


Notes.—Permits recorded at (b) above may be for only short periods of employment.


The number of cases recorded at (c) above excludes visitors or students given permission to take up resident domestic employment for which no statistics are maintained.


5.The principal industries or occupations entered by foreign workers were:—


Category (a)—Agriculture, Coalmining, Textiles, Brick making, Domestic Service (mainly hospitals and institutions) and nursing.


Category (b)—Domestic Service (mainly private), Entertainment, Student Employment, Nursing, Teaching, Agriculture, Textiles, Tinplate and Brickmaking.


Category (c)—No statistical record by industries or occupations is available.

a care-and-maintenance basis, in order to provide alternative employment?

Sir W. Monckton: I will look into those further facts and see what can be done about it. The date of 11th February is the last available date for which I have full information.

Foreign Workers

Mr. J. A. Sparks: asked the Minister of Labour how many persons of foreign nationality were admitted to this country to take up employment each year during the past five years; and what were the principal industries they entered.

Sir W. Monckton: The information available includes tables of figures, and, if I may, I will circulate the reply in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. Sparks: Is there scope for further admission of foreign nationals, and in which industries in particular could they usefully be placed?

Sir W. Monckton: I will look into that. I am not aware of the answer at the moment.

Following is the reply:

Labour Supply Inspectorate

Mr. Victor Yates: asked the Minister of Labour the powers and functions of the Labour Supply Inspectorate.

Sir W. Monckton: Labour supply inspectors have power to enter and inspect undertakings and to require the persons carrying on the undertaking to produce books, accounts and records, and to furnish information, relating to the use of labour in the undertaking.
They are authorised at present to use this power only when the undertaking has asked for more labour to be supplied. Their function is to advise whether the additional labour needs to be supplied.

Mr. Yates: Have those powers been increased over and above what they were when the Labour Supply Inspectorate previously worked under the Control of Engagements Order?

Sir W. Monckton: No, Sir. They have not been increased.

Newcastle-upon-Tyne

Mr. A. Blenkinsop: asked the Minister of Labour the total number of persons unemployed in Newcastle-upon-Tyne at the latest available date; the number of adult men included in this total; and a list of classes of employment mainly affected.

Sir W. Monckton: The number of unemployed in Newcastle-upon-Tyne at 11th February was 5,248, of whom 3,542 were men aged 18 and over. The industries with the largest numbers unemployed were: Shipbuilding and ship-repairing; building and contracting; non-electrical engineering; distribution; catering, hotels, etc.

Mr. Blenkinsop: Would the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that in view of the rather dangerous position with regard to shipbuilding and ship-repairing, he should take up the matter of steel allocations with his right hon. Friend the Minister of Supply?

Sir W. Monckton: The figures for 11th February which I have given are very nearly the same as those of a year ago, and the figures in shipbuilding are about 20 different. However, I will, of course, bear in mind what the hon. Member has mentioned.

Mr. Ernest Popplewell: Will the Minister also bear in mind that a large number of the 5,000-odd unemployed are disabled and that there is a crying need for further Remploy factories to be built in the area? Will he do everything possible to encourage the building of these Remploy factories to provide employment for these men?

Sir W. Monckton: I fully appreciate the importance of Remploy factories, but this is not the moment when I can encourage the belief that more can be built at once.

Mr. Blenkinsop: Would the Minister agree that, while it is true there has not been an increase in the numbers of unemployed during the last month, nevertheless, in view of the steel position, there is great anxiety in the area about the employment position in the shipbuilding industry?

Sir W. Monckton: I will bear that in mind. My comparison, however, was not with a month ago but with a year ago.

Private Employment Agencies

Mr. Yates: asked the Minister of Labour, in view of the fact that an adequate service for catering employment is already provided by his employment exchanges, and in view of the unsatisfactory activities of fee-charging private employment agencies, if he will take powers to enable him to regulate their activities.

Lieut.-Colonel Lipton: asked the Minister of Labour whether he will take steps to control or abolish privately-owned employment agencies charging excessive fees.

Sir W. Monckton: The question of the regulation of private employment agencies is under consideration.

Mr. Yates: Will the Minister bear in mind that in some cases amounts of from £10 to £30 are being charged for obtaining work and that this is most undesirable? In view of the attitude of the International Labour Office, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman be good enough to consider their viewpoint regarding the closing of such agencies?

Sir W. Monckton: Yes, Sir. It is the desirability of bringing the matter into accord with Convention No. 96 of the


International Labour Conference, 1949, that makes it necessary to consider at official level what ought to be done. We expect the report to be with Ministers shortly.

Lieut.-Colonel Lipton: Is the Minister aware that a further reason for speedy action in this matter is the growing unemployment, which makes it necessary that this racket should be brought to an end as quickly as possible?

Sir W. Monckton: I do not want to assume the racket until I have seen the report.

Sir William Darling: Will my right hon. and learned Friend bear in mind that these private, independent employment agencies are very much preferred by many classes of workers, and will he see that their independence is preserved?

Oral Answers to Questions — NATIONAL SERVICE

Conscientious Objectors

Mr. Cyril Bence: asked the Minister of Labour the number of applications for exemption from the National Service Act, on grounds of conscience, received in Scotland, and the number rejected during the month of January.

Sir W. Monckton: Four applications to be registered as conscientious objectors were heard during January, of which one was rejected. In two of the cases accepted, the men were made liable to be called up for non-combatant duties.

Mr. Bence: Is the Minister aware that Mr. James Alexander Troup of Edinburgh, a qualified school teacher, who was accepted and registered as a conscientious objector, has been drafted to work for the Forestry Commission? Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman of opinion that the employment of a school teacher in the Forestry Commission is of greater national importance than school teaching?

Sir W. Monckton: I will, of course, look carefully into any individual case which the hon. Member brings to my notice. I point out, however, that the decision in this case rests not with me but with the tribunal, in whose hands Parliament laid it.

Aircraft Apprentices

Air Commodore Harvey: asked the Minister of Labour if he will exempt apprentices engaged in the aircraft industry from National Service.

Sir W. Monckton: No, Sir but the possibility of allowing some measure of deferment in special cases is under examination.

Air Commodore Harvey: How is the aircraft industry to produce what is expected of it if the men who are the most valuable are to be called up at the end of their training?

Sir W. Monckton: My anxiety is to meet that difficulty as far as I can without impinging upon the desirability of keeping the universality of the call-up.

Mr. M. Lindsay: While appreciating the importance of keeping the universality of the call-up, may I ask whether it is not much more important in present circumstances to get the highest possible aircraft production for defence purposes?

Sir W. Monckton: It is for that reason that we propose to look into this matter in special cases. The reason why we want to do so on a limited scale is to avoid encouraging similar claims for other types of employment.

Mr. Frederick Lee: Is the Minister aware that apprentices in the aircraft industry are in no way different from apprentices in other sections of engineering, and will he keep this in mind?

Sir W. Monckton: It is only when they make a special difference that they are considered in the way I have indicated. I am well aware that apprentices in other branches of industry might also claim similar exemptions.

Oral Answers to Questions — SCOTLAND

Maintenance Orders (Reciprocal Enforcement)

Mr. Hector Hughes: asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will take steps to provide means whereby a Scottish wife deserted by her husband can obtain in Scotland a maintenance order enforceable in British Dominions, Colonies and foreign countries.

The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. James Stuart): As I explained to the hon. and learned Member in a recent letter, there are formidable difficulties in the way of making reciprocal arrangements between Scotland and countries of the Commonwealth overseas for the making and enforcement of maintenance orders. Even greater difficulties would have to be overcome before such arrangements could be made between Scotland and foreign countries. I am afraid that I can hold out no hope of early legislation on the subject.

Mr. Hughes: Is the Minister aware that great suffering and injustice is being done by the absence of any such provision? Surely he will take some steps to try to obviate that suffering and injustice?

Mr. Stuart: I certainly wish to do so, but there are grave difficulties. I have already answered a Question on this subject on 4th December, and I shall be very glad to discuss it with the hon. and learned Gentleman.

School Teachers

Sir T. Moore: asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he proposes to take to increase the number of certificated school teachers, and to retain science and mathematical teachers in the educational service of Scotland.

Mr. J. Stuart: In order to increase the number of certificated teachers, I propose to continue the scheme of special recruitment started by my predecessor last August. It is having a satisfactory response. As regards the second part of the Question, I have no evidence that a greater proportion of the teachers of mathematics and science is leaving the educational service than of teachers of other subjects.

Sir T. Moore: Is not the real solution, as I have said on many occasions, to give teachers an adequate salary with a proper relation to what they would get from private employers? After all, do not inducements apply to teachers as much as to the rest of us?

Mr. John Rankin: Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that it is of more advantage to the teaching profession to send teachers to do forestry work than to keep them in the schools?

Information Office (Economies)

Mr. James H. Hoy: asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what cuts are being made in the services at present provided by the Scottish Information Office.

Mr. J. Stuart: The services provided by the Scottish Information Office are being reduced in accordance with the policy set out in the reply given by my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to the Question asked by the hon. and gallant Member for Renfrew, East (Major Guy Lloyd), on 29th January, 1952.

Mr. Hoy: Can the Secretary of State be more explicit? What services for which he is responsible are to be cut as a result of this economy?

Mr. Stuart: Yes, Sir. The Financial Secretary gave a detailed answer. As far as Scotland is concerned, it does involve discontinuance of films distribution by mobile vans and discontinuance of the Central Office of Information lecture service and a reduction of expenditure on exhibitions by approximately one-half.

Mr. Hoy: In respect of the films service, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is very much appreciated by trade and industry and that the cost involved is not large? Would he reconsider his decision on this specific point?

Mr. Stuart: It does not mean that there will be no films but that they will be given in the most economical places.

Harbour Piers and Ferries Act

Mr. J. Grimond: asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will introduce legislation to amend Section 7 of the Harbour Piers and Ferries (Scotland) Act, 1937, so as to increase the maximum, below which a Provisional Order is not required, from £5,000 to £15,000.

Mr. J. Stuart: I cannot promise amending legislation; but I am examining the possibility of shortening and simplifying the procedure involved in obtaining an Order under the Act.

Mr. Grimond: When the Secretary of State considers this matter, will he bear in mind that it is quite illogical to limit local authorities on a particular matter when they are allowed to spend large sums in other ways, and will he also bear


in mind that, owing to the change in the value of money, there is much waste of time and expense in promoting orders for comparatively minor schemes of pier and harbour construction?

Mr. Stuart: I agree that the change in the value of money certainly makes a difference, but legislation and the time for it is another matter.

Fishing Vessel "Blenheim" (Arrestment)

Sir David Robertson: asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware of the arrest of the motor fishing vessel, "Blenheim," in Thurso Harbour, at the instance of the Longhope lifeboat crew who are claiming property salvage on their own account, including expenses incurred by the Royal National Lifeboat Institution; and if he will, in the interests of food production and full employment, take steps to have this vessel released from arrest.

Mr. J. Stuart: This matter is at present the subject of an action for declarator before the Court of Session and I have no authority to interfere. I understand that the arrestment could be withdrawn at any time by the defenders (who are not fishermen) giving a bond for £1,000, or consigning the money.

Sir D. Robertson: Will my right hon. Friend draw the attention of this fine old society and this very gallant crew to the fact that their action savours more of wrecking and piracy than of life saving? Will he take steps to ensure that it does not occur again?

Mr. Stuart: I can only reply that the Royal National Lifeboat Institution is a voluntary organisation for which I have no responsibility. This may be an example of private enterprise.

Oral Answers to Questions — HOUSING, SCOTLAND

Subsidy Rates

Mr. Hector Hughes: asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is yet in a position to state the results of his discussions with the Scottish local authority associations about the revision of housing subsidies.

Mr. J. Stuart: I would refer the hon. and learned Member to my reply of 28th February to the hon. Lady the Member for Aberdeen, South (Lady Tweedsmuir).

Mr. Hughes: Is the Secretary of State aware that this is a very urgent matter and that it is not merely replies in Parliament we want but something actively done to solve the problem?

Mr. Stuart: The result of the discussions with the local authorities was announced in reply to the noble Lady to which I have just referred. It is in HANSARD.

Mr. A. Woodburn: Will the right hon. Gentleman take the opportunity of getting an analysis of the figures because, in documents circulated, local authorities seem to be at variance with the suggestions made in his statement and it would be useful to hon. Members if these differences could be cleared up?

Mr. Stuart: If the right hon. Gentleman is in need of further information, I will of course supply it, but if he will refer to the OFFICIAL REPORT of 28th February he will find the Exchequer contribution and the rates contribution under the new subsidy arrangements.

Mr. William Ross: Have not the local authorities asked for further discussions on this matter?

Mr. Stuart: Yes, I believe they have; that is the case.

Mr. Hoy: If these local authorities have already expressed great dissatisfaction about the announcement made, that could not be as a result of agreement as announced in the right hon. Gentleman's original answer?

Mr. Stuart: It is very difficult to give satisfaction in all quarters. I notice from criticisms that some people say it is too much and some say it is too little, but we will do our best to strike a balance.

Stone Building

Mr. Patrick Maitland: asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will inquire into a reply by his Department of Health last 9th January to a request made last 19th November by the Lanarkshire County Council for permission to build a limited number of houses with stone fronts at an extra cost


of £91 each, but with a saving of 5 per cent. in the number of bricks required; and whether he will reconsider the discouraging reply which was sent.

Mr. J. Stuart: The Department actually agreed to the County Council's proposal, but if my hon. Friend will let me know in what respect he thinks the reply should be reconsidered, I shall have the matter examined.

Mr. Maitland: May I draw the attention of the Secretary of State to—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]

Mr. P. Maitland: asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will instruct the Department of Health to prepare plans for the increased use of stone in housebuilding, particularly by means of standard-sized blocks cut at the quarry, and by designing housing types which use stone for load-bearing to permit the use of cheap materials for those parts of the building which are free from stress.

Mr. J. Stuart: As a rule local authorities prefer to prepare their own plans, but I am passing my hon. Friend's suggestion as to standardisation to the Building Materials Committee of the Scottish Council (Development and Industry) who are now considering how stone building in Scotland can be increased.

Mr. Maitland: May I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is aware that encouragement given to the quarrying industry will attract labour and possibly result in a speedier development of that side of the housebuilding programme?

Mr. Stuart: I can assure my hon. Friend that I would very much like to see more stone building carried out. It is a matter of cost, time, and so on, but I would like to encourage it in every way I can.

Oral Answers to Questions — GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS (MEMBERS' LETTERS)

Mr. W. R. Williams: asked the Prime Minister whether he will issue instructions that any replies sent to hon. Members shall be signed by the appropriate Minister or Parliamentary Secretary and not by private secretaries.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Winston Churchill): It is generally understood that whenever possible Ministers will themselves sign letters to Members of Parliament on matters of importance.

Mr. Williams: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there have been many instances lately where that has not occurred? Will he make quite sure that the general instruction, that apparently he is agreeable to, will be carried out and conformed to by all Ministers?

The Prime Minister: Let us see how the opinions expressed today affect practice in the future.

Oral Answers to Questions — ROYAL COMMISSION ON MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE (TERMS OF REFERENCE)

Mr. John Parker: asked the Prime Minister whether he will recommend such alteration of the terms of reference of the Royal Commission now sitting on Marriage and Divorce, so as to enable them also to consider and report on the present laws about illegitimate children.

The Prime Minister: I am advised that it would not be desirable to extend the terms of reference of the Royal Commission on Marriage and Divorce in the way the hon. Member suggests. The Commission has already a great deal of work to do and the law relating to illegitimate children is complicated and had better be studied separately in the light of the Royal Commission's recommendations on the aspects of family life which have already been referred to it.

Oral Answers to Questions — NATIONAL FINANCE

Post-War Credits

Mr. Sparks: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the total amount of post-war credits remaining unpaid; and how much has already been redeemed.

The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. John Boyd-Carpenter): The total amount of post-war credit originally created was about £800 million. £202 million has been repaid to date or set off against arrears of tax under the arrangement announced on 29th October, 1946, leaving about £598 million still outstanding.

Mr. Sparks: Can the Financial Secretary say whether his right hon. Friend would be prepared to make a further concession by way of repayment of postwar credits?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: The hon. Gentleman must not expect me to anticipate, even by a few minutes, the Budget statement of my right hon. Friend.

Foreign Travel (Currency Allowance)

Mr. Kenneth Thompson: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that full-rate charges are made in most Continental countries for fares and accommodation for children over 10 years of age; and if he will therefore make the currency allowance at the £25 limit available for travellers aged 10 and over.

The Minister of State for Economic Affairs (Sir Arthur Salter): I appreciate the point raised by my hon. Friend, but I am afraid that it is impossible to make any concession in the present circumstances.

Mr. Thompson: Is my right hon Friend aware that the present limit for children is causing very great concern both to parents and to educationalists, who find themselves unable to take children or parties of children abroad at a time when it would do the most good? Will he look at the matter again?

Sir A. Salter: I have gone into this question with very considerable care and in consultation with representatives of the organisations concerned. I fully realise the point made by my hon. Friend, that it is not usual to make reductions of charges to children to as high an age as 15.

Mr. Ede: Will the right hon. Gentleman consult with the Ministry of Education, and with active teachers who have found themselves gravely handicapped in arranging school parties for the holidays this year, before he reaches his final decision?

Sir A. Salter: Yes, Sir. I have taken into account the point made by the right hon. Gentleman. I fully realise that the age of 15 is high for this distinction, but I also realise, as I think the House will in a very short time, the reasons which

have been in our minds in considering no concession possible at this moment.

Gift Parcels (Irish Republic)

Mr. Harold Sutcliffe: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what Regulations are now in force as regards food parcels and other gifts sent personally from Eire to friends in this country.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: Bona fide gifts from the Irish Republic which do not exceed 22 lb. in weight and which consist exclusively of foodstuffs, discarded apparel, medical supplies and soap are admitted free of import licence and Customs charges, with the exception that those containing canned fruits, dried fruits, chocolate and sugar confectionery are prohibited.

Mr. Sutcliffe: Can my right hon. Friend give any idea of the quantity of fruit and confectionery of this nature which are confiscated, and can he say what happens to them?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: I should want notice of that question.

Sterling Area (Balance of Payments)

Mr. M. Philips Price: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consider taking steps to prevent in future financial disequilibrium arising between the sterling area and the European Payments Union.

Sir A. Salter: The measures which we and other sterling area countries are taking to right our balance of payments will, I hope, have this effect.

Canadian Loans

Mr. Eric Johnson: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the amount of the loans the United Kingdom has received from Canada, since 1939, which have not yet been repaid; the amount of principle and interest which is repayable annually in respect of these loans; and also the amount the United Kingdom has received in free gifts from Canada since 1939.

Sir A. Salter: As the answer is rather long, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate the answer in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer (all amounts expressed in Canadian dollars):
In 1942 the Canadian Parliament appropriated $1,000 million as a gift to the United Kingdom for the purchase of food, munitions and other requirements.
In 1942 the Government of Canada made a loan of $700 million, free of interest, to the United Kingdom. Under agreements made between the United Kingdom Government and the Government of Canada, dollars accruing from the sale by United Kingdom residents to persons not resident in the United Kingdom of Canadian market securities or from redemption are used in repayment of the loan, but the Canadian Government allow us to set off against the amount repayable in this way the cost of new direct investment in Canada by United Kingdom residents. By 31st December, 1951, the outstanding principal had been reduced to $222,656,798. The two Governments have agreed that the interest free provisions of the loan shall continue in force until 1st January, 1954.
During the war, Canada provided under the Mutual Aid Programme munitions, food and other war supplies and services to the United Kingdom. The total aid given under this programme amounted to about $1,871 million.
Under the terms of the Financial Agreement between the United Kingdom Government and the Government of Canada dated 6th March, 1946, the Government of Canada extended to the United Kingdom a line of credit of $1,250 million, repayable in fifty annual instalments, with interest at 2 per cent. per annum. A total of $1,185 million was drawn by the United Kingdom. The first annual payment in respect of interest and principal fell due on 31st December, 1951, and on that date payment was made $23,700,000 in respect of interest, and $14,010,255 in respect of principal. The amount now outstanding is $1,170,989,745.
Under the terms of the 1946 Agreement indebtedness amounting to $425 million of the Government of the United Kingdom to Canada in respect of the Commonwealth Air Training plan was cancelled. Under a supplementary agreement all remaining claims arising out of the war were settled by a payment by the Government of the United Kingdom to the Government of Canada of $150 million.
The foregoing does not include assistance offered by the Government of Canada to member countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, including the United Kingdom, to further the common defence effort.

London Aeroplanes, Limited

Sir T. Moore: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will explain the circumstances in which the firm known as London Aeroplanes Limited were able to evade or avoid paying Income Tax and Excess Profits Tax to the sum of £98,374; and what period did this amount cover.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: I cannot give information about the taxation affairs of particular taxpayers.

Sir T. Moore: But does not my hon. Friend think it very unfair that decent law-abiding citizens should be threatened by the Inland Revenue Department if they are a few weeks overdue, whereas these people and men like Sydney Stanley get away to a fantastic extent?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: My hon. and gallant Friend will appreciate that it is a very well established principle not to give Parliamentary answers which disclose information about the individual affairs of individual taxpayers given to the Inland Revenue in confidence.

Oral Answers to Questions — CIVIL SERVICE

Training Schemes

Mr. Douglas Houghton: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will bear in mind the recommendations of the Assheton Report on Training in the Civil Service, Command Paper No. 6525, when considering cuts in central and departmental training schemes.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: I have had the recommendations of the Assheton Report constantly in mind in considering retrenchment in training schemes.

Mr. Houghton: Does the hon. Gentleman think it a prudent course at the present moment to cut the training services in the Civil Service by half at a time when his right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of Labour is advising the general Advisory Council to strengthen and extend training services in industry?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: I do not accept the implication of the supplementary question. The main fabric of the training system has been preserved.

Mr. Austen Albu: Does the hon. Gentleman also consider that there are any advantages to be gained by making cuts in the Organisation and Methods Department of the Treasury?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that there is no system so perfect that will not repay scrutiny with a view to proper economy.

Staff Reductions, Wales

Mr. Tudor Watkins: asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury how many civil servants, both male and female, have been given notice to terminate their employment recently in Wales; what steps are being taken to recommend them for employment elsewhere; and whether the position may be reviewed where there is no alternative employment for such persons.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: I regret that I do not possess the figures for which the hon. Member asks in the first part of his Question. Civil servants who are declared redundant are advised to register at a local office of the Ministry of Labour, where every assistance is given them to find other suitable employment.
The answer to the last part of the Question is in the negative.

Oral Answers to Questions — INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Mr. Charles Ian Orr-Ewing: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in order to encourage Government research and development establishments to undertake work for industry, he will reconsider the ruling whereby any money earned for such work is subtracted from the total of their Treasury grant.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: No, Sir. Because of the shortage of equipment and skilled manpower I do not consider that the change suggested would have the effect desired. It would, moreover, involve abandoning methods of accounting expressly preferred by the Public Accounts Committee.

Mr. Orr-Ewing: Would not my hon. Friend agree that it is in the interests of long-term research and development that the partnership between industry and these research establishments should be fomented, and that this is one method employed in increasing that partnership?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: I do not quarrel with the general principles of my hon. Friend, but the present shortage, both of manpower and of materials, would mean that further increased services to industry in this direction would involve a curtailment of the general research on behalf

of the Government, which is perhaps the main purpose of these organisations.

Mr. Woodburn: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that research establishments, at Farnborough and elsewhere, give identical free services to many branches of industry which is greatly appreciated?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: I am certainly aware of that.

Oral Answers to Questions — U.S. FILMS (MUTUAL SECURITY AGENCY)

Mr. Charles Royle: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what future use is to be made of United States films and techniques, made available by the Mutual Security Agency, formerly distributed by the Government Film Unit.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: The Government are considering this in consultation with the Mutual Security Agency.

Mr. Royle: Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the great value of these films to productive enterprise and how they are being appreciated by all types of industry, and will he give all the encouragement he can to the continuance of their importation?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: I do not dissent from what the hon. Gentleman has said.

Oral Answers to Questions — SOCIAL SURVEY REPORTS

Mr. Albu: asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he will publish a list of the subjects investigated by the social survey during the last two years; and the Departments for whom the work was undertaken.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a list of the social survey reports undertaken during the last two years, and of the Departments for whom they were undertaken.

Mr. Albu: Can the hon. Gentleman say whether these investigations have made a contribution towards the economy and efficiency of administration?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: Some have in a considerable degree, and some perhaps in a rather less degree

Following is the list:

SUBJECTS INVESTIGATED BY SOCIAL SURVEY, 1950–1952


Subject
Description
Commissioning Department


Older People's Diets
To investigate the nutrition of elderly people and by reference to other inquiries to show the association of diets and health amongst old people.
Ministry of Health.


Survey of Adolescents
To investigate the educational and vocational background and the spare-time activities of the adolescents with a view to providing information relevant to the functions and interests of departments.
Ministry of Labour and Service Departments.


Recruitment to Civil Defence.
This survey was carried out in order (a) to discover the general reaction to the subject of civil defence and the effectiveness of the publicity exhibited up to the date of the survey and (b) to decide which were the most effective lines to follow in future recruiting programmes.
Home Office.


Employment of Elderly Workers.
To investigate the proportions of elderly people in employment, the nature of their occupations and associated factors as well as their attitudes to employment and remaining at work after retiring age.
Ministry of Labour.


Festival of Britain
An inquiry into the state of knowledge of and opinion about the objects of the "Festival" with special reference to local activities.
Festival of Britain Office.


Medresco Hearing Aid
To investigate the use made of the aid with view to improving the system of instruction or servicing.
Ministry of Health.


Utility and the Public
A survey of the attitudes of the public towards the Utility Scheme.
Board of Trade.


Sound in Dwellings
To investigate, under actual daily living conditions, the extent to which a new type of party wall reduced the amount of noise heard in local authority housing.
D.S.I.R.


Hamilton Housing Survey.
An inquiry into the housing problems of older people.
Department of Health for Scotland.


Audience Reaction to the film "The Undefeated."
To examine fears expressed by cinema exhibitors that this film about disabled ex-servicemen might upset audiences and have adverse effects on recruitment. The report showed these suggestions were unfounded, and led to wide commercial showing.
C.O.I.


Independent Traders Index.
The enrolment of a panel of independent traders who would volunteer to give information about their monthly sales so that a sales index could be constructed.
Board of Trade.


Use of Stationery Supplies.
To provide information about the use and supply of stationery in Government Offices for a review of the work of Stationery Office being undertaken by Organisation and Methods Division of the Treasury.
Treasury.


Young Children's Diets
An inquiry to determine the nutritional level of children under the age of 5 years.
Ministry of Health.


Local Authority Tenants
To investigate how far tenants of local authority houses in Scotland would be interested in purchasing their own houses or other local authority houses.
Department of Health for Scotland.


Audience Reaction
To examine the reception and effects of three recruiting films exhibited in cinemas.
C.O.I.


Colonial Affairs
To investigate public knowledge of Colonial Affairs
Colonial Office.


Telephone Directories
To investigate the actual use made of London Directories with a view to deciding whether they could be withheld from subscribers without great inconvenience or greatly increasing calls on the directory inquiry service.
General Post Office.


Birmingham Productivity Exhibition
An inquiry made to find out: (a) the nature of the audience at this exhibition; (b) the practical results accruing from their visit amongst a sample of visitors called on some three weeks later.
C.O.I.


Night Baking
To investigate the possible effects on consumers of stopping the baking of bread at night with view to facilitating the work of the Departmental Committee on Night Baking.
Ministry of Labour.

Subject
Description
Commissioning Department


Scientific Manpower
A pilot study of the present distribution of science graduates made with view to showing whether the Scientific Civil Service is recruiting its necessary share of the better graduates, and obtaining the reasons given for not entering the Civil Service.
D.S.I.R.


Effects of a Local Road Safety Campaign.
An inquiry designed to measure the effects of the campaign on road users' behaviour on the roads and their attitudes to road safety problems.
Ministry of Transport.


Welfare Foods
An inquiry made to discover the extent to which mothers and expectant mothers make use of the Ministry of Food welfare products and the difficulties they have in obtaining them.
Ministry of Food.


Borstal Studies
To analyse available information on the history and background of a sample of Borstal cases with view to tracing the effects of Borstal treatment and indentifying the classes of offenders most likely to respond to treatment.
Home Office and Prison Commissioners.


Parliament Past and Present.
To examine the reception and effects of the exhibition designed to illustrate the history and functioning of Parliament.
C.O.I.


Domestic Heating
To investigate fuel consumption and expenditure on heating in low cost dwellings with view to implementing the result of laboratory experimental work on heating.
D.S.I.R.


Diphtheria Immunisation
To investigate new problems in the Diphtheria Immunisation with special reference to fears of the suggested association of poliomyelitis and diphtheria and the effects of temporary suspension of the campaign.
Ministry of Health.


Dissemination of Scientific and Technical Knowledge.
A pilot study to measure the flow of scientific information to industry with view to improving the work of the Technical Information Service of D.S.I.R.
D.S.I.R.


Consumer Expenditure Series.
To investigate spending habits in special fields in order to assist the compilation of published accounts of National Income and Expenditure and, in particular, to examine, on the basis of small experimental inquiries, the technical problems involved in conducting the forthcoming large scale official Cost of Living Budgetary inquiry.
Central Statistical Office and Treasury.


Survey of Sickness
Statistical studies on a national scale designed to show the incidence of ill-health and injuries as well as the use made of the medical service.
Registrar General's Office.


Studies of Public Knowledge of the Economic Situation.
Investigations into the extent of public understanding of the main economic issues and knowledge of the associated facts
Treasury.

Oral Answers to Questions — CENTRAL OFFICE OF INFORMATION

Mr. A. Hargreaves: asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what saving will be effected in a full financial year by discontinuing the Central Office of Information film service: and what number of staff is involved.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: The saving effected, by the discontinuation of the Crown Film Unit, the Mobile Film Unit Distribution Service and the Theatrical Film Distribution Service will be approximately £375,000 per annum. The number of staff directly involved is 302.
In addition some saving is to be expected from the system of charging for loans from the Central Film Library.

Mr. Hargreaves: asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what saving will be effected in a full financial year by closing down the Central Office of Information lecture service; and what number of staff is involved.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: The saving will be approximately £70,000 per annum. The number of staff directly involved is 42.

Mr. Hargreaves: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that these services are very much appreciated in the smaller towns and villages and will he say whether the figures he has given apply to the United Kingdom as a whole, or do they exclude Scotland?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter: With regard to the second part of the supplementary question, the figures I have given are United Kingdom figures. With regard to the first part of the supplementary question I would ask the hon. Gentleman to appreciate that it is a question of what can properly be afforded in this direction in present circumstances.

PRIVATE NOTICE QUESTIONS

Mr. Sydney Silverman: Mr. Speaker, I desire to raise with you, for the guidance of the House, a question relating to Private Notice Questions. This morning I sought your leave to ask the President of the Board of Trade, by Private Notice, a Question in the following terms:
To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has any statement to make about the effect on trade and employment, particularly in Lancashire, of the Australian Government's announced cut of 80 per cent. in its trade with the United Kingdom.

Mr. Speaker: It is against the rule for the hon. Member to read his Question. Perhaps he will put a question to me about it.

Mr. Silverman: I am sorry if that was not the right thing to do, but it would be difficult to make my point clear, unless the House were in possession of the terms of the Question because, after querying the matter in the ordinary way with the Table, you indicated to me that there were four Questions on the Order Paper relating to the same subject matter and that, therefore, in your opinion the matter would be improperly raised by Private Notice.
The point that I have to ask relates directly to the terms of my Question and to the terms of the Questions on the Order Paper. There were indeed four such Questions. Three of them related exclusively to what one might call minor questions about motorcars. The only

one that had any direct relation to my own was that of my hon. Friend the Member for Burnley (Mr. Burke) who, indeed, sought to ask a Question on Thursday, not by Private Notice, about what action the President proposes to take arising out of the drastic results of this announcement.
My Question had nothing to do with drastic results or any results. I thought that it would be proper for the Minister to have an opportunity at a very early stage of making a general statement on the whole matter without any such criticism or opinion implied as there was in those Questions. Nobody doubted that the matter was of public importance. Nobody doubted that it was urgent, and I beg to submit very respectfully that my Question was not in conflict with the rule as defined in Erskine May.

Mr. Walter Fletcher: Further to that point of order and as I asked your leave, Mr. Speaker, 24 hours before the hon. Member for Nelson and Colne (Mr. S Silverman) to put a question by Private Notice of an even wider character than his but covering the same point, would you take into consideration the fact that the rule says that the Question has to be put down at the earliest possible moment. If, therefore, a Question was put down 24 hours before that put down by the hon. Member, surely it should take precedence.

Mr. Speaker: The rule is quite clear. It is that it is not proper to seek by a Private Notice Question to anticipate a Question on the Paper of which another hon. Member has given notice. Though it is true that none of the Questions on the Paper are in identical terms with that sought to be asked by the hon. Member, I came to the conclusion that these four Questions—and in particular the Question standing in the name of the hon. Member for Burnley (Mr. Burke)—could not be answered without covering the points in the proposed Question of the hon. Gentleman. Therefore, I disallowed it.

Orders of the Day — WAYS AND MEANS

Considered in Committee.

[Colonel Sir CHARLES MACANDREW in the Chair]

BUDGET PROPOSALS

3.35 p.m.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. R. A. Butler): On Budget day the eyes of the nation are upon us, as we review the state of the economy over the past year, weigh up the prospects for the coming year and decide what course we should take. This year the task is even more important than usual. The issues we face—I hope together—are serious indeed. What we do will largely determine not only our economic outlook for next year, but our entire future. This is the mood in which I have approached my task and in which I feel sure that the Committee will listen to what I have to tell them

OUT-TURN OF 1951–52

I propose to begin my review of the year that is just ending, the financial year 1951–52, with a short summary of the Exchequer accounts. This summary will be brief, for the difficulties facing us today go far wider than these mere figures. One consequence of a Budget before the end of the financial year is, of course, that final receipts and expenditure up to 31st March are not yet known. The figures which will appear in the Financial Statement should prove reasonably accurate, but they must be treated as provisional. We have tried to make the Financial Statement as comprehensive as possible.

I estimate that by the end of the year we shall have spent about £4,070 million. This is less than the Budget estimate by about £120 million. Expenditure on Consolidated Fund services and sinking funds is likely to exceed the estimate by some £8 million. The shortfall arises entirely in the field of Supply services and is the result of a number of different factors. For reasons which the Committee know, defence expenditure in the year coming to an end will have

fallen short of the estimate. At the same time, however, Ministry of Supply expenditure will have exceeded the original estimate by about £50 million. A large part of this will, in due course, be reimbursed by the Services in payment for finished equipment.

There have also been some Supplementary Estimates for strategic and trading stocks. The other Supplementary Estimates have been offset partly by the reduction in the Exchequer contribution to the National Insurance Fund, and partly by shortfalls in a number of Departmental Estimates.

Thus, total Revenue I now expect to be about £4,440 million, about £200 million above the Budget estimate. The biggest increase, perhaps about £100 million is in Customs and Excise duties, which are likely to yield about £1,755 million against an estimated £1,651 million. Most of this surplus is accounted for by the duties under the Import Duties Act, 1932, and the Purchase Tax, reflecting the sharp rise in prices over the year. On the Inland Revenue side, I expect an increase of about £70 million—an out-turn of perhaps £2,370 million against the estimate of £2,302 million. Most of this increase is attributable to the Income Tax, which will probably yield about £1,690 million compared with the estimate of £1,625 million. The yield of the other Inland Revenue duties will be reasonably close to the estimates.

As a result I now expect to have at the end of March, on the conventional basis, an "above the line" surplus of over £360 million, as against the figure of £39 million at which my predecessor arrived, before allowing, of course, for the reduction in the Exchequer contribution to the National Insurance Fund.

ECONOMIC BACKGROUND

The Exchequer, in a narrow sense, is thus doing well. How, then, has it happened that our general economic position declined so markedly? I would attempt to give the impressions I received to the Committee. In January, 1951, the late Government, faced with the new and heavy burden of defence, budgeted for a "significant fall" in civil investment at home, and some decline in civil consumption at home. Realising that this would not be enough, they accepted that there must be a decline in the balance of


payments surplus. They set themselves, however, to maintain a balance, apart from strategic stockpiling, on the United Kingdom overall current account in the year before them.

In this year, there was one serious new factor, which made the penalty of failure more serious than at any time since the war. Marshall Aid had just been suspended, and the first repayment of the United States and Canadian loans was in sight. This meant the removal of the cushion of external assistance upon which our economy had rested since the end of the war. Failure to pay our way would quickly mean, therefore, drawing on the gold reserves.

Unfortunately, as one of my predecessors once remarked, "Great Expectations" was followed by "Bleak House." Over the year as a whole, the deficit on the balance of payments was over £400 million more than was bargained for. Some of this was due to events that could not have been foreseen. Invisible income fell below expectations, partly because of the loss of Abadan. The terms of trade proved worse than was forecast. But this is not the whole story.

The state of the internal economy was such as to hamper the expansion of exports and to stimulate an increase of imports. Production did not increase so much as was expected and the Budget failed to produce any general decline in personal consumption.

Instead of falling, the volume of civil investment rose substantially. On top of the defence burden, this put a heavy overload on the industries producing vehicles, engineering goods and other metal products. Order books grew longer than ever and the extra exports, which the world was ready to buy, did not go out. At the same time, other industries met with a slack or falling demand abroad. It was thus not surprising that the total volume of exports failed to expand as fast as the situation required.

The other big factor was the rise in imports. Compared with 1950, the increase in volume was about £300 million; but, because of higher prices, the total increase in the import bill was £1,100 million. The balance of payments deficit came next, as night follows day. In the year as a whole, we passed from an over-

all surplus of £238 million in 1950 to a deficit of £516 million in 1951—a swing of no less than £750 million.

In fact, the deterioration was more serious still. Most of the deficit happened in the second half of the year; it was then running at the annual rate of over £800 million a year. The deficit with the non-sterling world was much greater still. In the first half of the year, it was running at an annual rate of about £325 million; in the second half, the annual rate was nearly £1,200 million.

This United Kingdom deficit in itself meant a severe drain on the gold reserves. The drain was all the greater because the position of the other sterling area countries was also getting worse. The prices of their main exports—rubber, tin, wool and so on—which had been so high in the winter of 1950–51 were falling to more normal levels, while their imports—the result of the earlier rise in incomes—were increasing.

As a result, most of them moved into substantial deficit, not only with ourselves, but with the non-sterling world. Under this double strain, the loss of gold gathered momentum. After increasing by £203 million in the first half of 1951, the reserves fell in the second half by £547 million. At the end of the year, they stood at only £835 million.

I must remind the Committee that these reserves are the foundation on which is built the whole structure of trade between the sterling area and the rest of the world. Events have shown that they must be adequate for the work they have to do. During 1951, with the tapering-off of Marshall Aid, a sterling area deficit with the rest of the world could be met only by credit with the European Payments Union or by drawing on the reserves.

Here, it is well to reflect on what would have happened if we had allowed things to drift. If the reserves had been allowed to run out, as I told the House before and now tell the Committee, we here in this island would, before the end of the year, have found ourselves unable to secure either our daily bread or the raw materials upon which both employment and production depend. There would have been expanding areas of real want and of growing unemployment.

EXTERNAL ACTION

This was the prospect which faced us when we took office. The United Kingdom was committed to a very large defence programme, with no certainty of continuing economic support from the United States or any other North Atlantic Power. Indeed, we had no assurance that support would, as my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said in the Defence debate, be
on a scale in keeping with the defence burden undertaken by the late Prime Minister or with our needs."—[OFFICIAL., REPORT, 5th March, 1952; Vol. 497, c. 433.]

At the same time, we were faced with a large and growing United Kingdom deficit with the non-sterling world, including a formidable deficit with the dollar area. The sterling area as a whole was in major deficit with the non-sterling world, resulting in a drain on the gold and dollar reserves of a most perilous character.

I announced emergency action on 7th November. Imports were cut and the Bank rate was raised. In January, the Finance Ministers of the Commonwealth met together in London. Our objective was clear: to bring the sterling area as a whole into balance as quickly as possible. Any failure to do this could mean only the rapid exhaustion of the reserves and the disintegration of the sterling system with all that implies.

I described to the House on 29th January the plan which we prepared together We all agreed to recommend action, the cumulative effect of which would be that the sterling area as a whole would be in balance with the rest of the world in respect of the second half of 1952, including at least a balance with the dollar area.

I must, however, inform the Committee that the effect of these measures in checking the drain on the gold reserves has not yet had time to operate fully. In the third quarter of 1951, the loss of reserves was 598 million dollars, or 46 million dollars a week. In the last quarter of 1951, the loss was 934 million dollars. or, if we exclude—as we should to get a true comparison—the service on the United States and Canadian lines of credit, 58 million dollars a week. In January: it was 299 million dollars, and in February 266 million dollars—an average for the year so far of 63 million dollars a

week. We have, in fact, lost 2,000 million dollars from the reserves since last June, and, at the end of February, they stood at 1,770 million dollars, or £632 million.

We can, in my view, confidently rely upon a considerable reduction in the rate of loss in the course of the next few weeks. But the future is uncertain, and the consequences of failure are dire. We are determined not to fail. No one can foresee the future, but, change as it may, we shall be ready to do whatever is required. That is why I recently came to the conclusion that the whole sterling area must set its sights appreciably higher.

The striking manner in which our fellow members of the Commonwealth have answered my further appeal reminds one of their moving response in more than one war. Together, we shall win through again. South Africa's response was immediate and cordial, and I am satisfied that we will be able to earn at least £50 million of her gold, and perhaps substantially more, for the central reserves during 1952. Over the week-end, the voice of Australia has rung clear. The United Kingdom must suffer from the drastic effects of Australia's severe and timely action to save an economy swollen by the recent boom in wool prices and now threatened by the consequences of smaller receipts from her staple industry, coinciding with a period of exceptional development.

I share the regret expressed by the Prime Minister of Australia that it is necessary temporarily to restrict imports from the United Kingdom, and I trust that the recovery in Australia's balance of payments will soon allow her to remove these restrictions. Hon. Members will note—

Mr. Sydney Silverman: rose—

Mr. Butler: I have foreseen the hon. Gentleman's intervention, because my next phrase meets him
Hon. Members will note that later in my speech I shall have to take account of this new factor as it affects our prospects. I have had stirring answers from that stalwart leader, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, and from my friends the Finance Ministers of India, Pakistan, Ceylon and Southern Rhodesia. They have each told me of their special difficulties.
All these Commonwealth countries, together with the colonial territories whose contribution to the economy of the sterling area is so vitally important, are taking determined action to ensure that the sterling area as a whole is not merely in balance with the rest of the world, as we planned together when we met in January, but will be in surplus with the rest of the world in the latter half of 1952. These are aims far more comprehensive than ever before adopted by the sterling Commonwealth.
I have also received a message from the Minister of Finance of the Irish Republic indicating his Government's understanding of the gravity of the situation and their determination to play their part in resolving it. He will, I understand, be making a statement in his own Parliament tomorrow, just as, I understand, some of my colleagues will also be making statements in their own town and their own place.
The British Government have decided to take further measures to match this story. On 29th January I announced that our part in the Commonwealth Finance Ministers plan was to reduce our deficit with the non-sterling world to £100 million in the second half of 1952. Our part in the new effort is to eliminate the United Kingdom deficit with the non-sterling world in the second half of 1952, after taking into account such defence aid as we may receive from the United States.
How do we set about this and achieve it? As for imports—we are already very tight-drawn. Even in 1951 the volume of imports was no more than 90–95 per cent. of that of 1938. Yet our population is now 6 per cent. greater than it was then and our industrial production, mostly based on imported material, is more than 40 per cent. greater. Clearly, there are no great margins here.
Nevertheless, we have now decided further to reduce the 1952 import programme by again cutting our purchases. In carrying out these further cuts, the nature of which, for commercial reasons, I cannot disclose, we shall ensure that the essential needs of industry are met, and that stocks are not reduced below what we consider to be a reasonable and safe level. We have also had to consider what savings we can make in our imports

from Western Europe. These have in large part—as the right hon. Gentleman opposite drew our attention in a letter to "The Times"—to be settled in gold, now that we have nearly exhausted our quota of credit in the European Payments Union.
A number of hon. Members have represented recently that further cuts should be made in our less essential imports from Western Europe. The scope, however, is severely limited. We could not hope to go on selling large quantities of manufactured consumer goods to Western Europe if we were to restrict our imports from them more than is absolutely necessary owing to our balance of payments situation. Quite apart from our close political ties with our Continental neighbours, it is essential in our own economic and commercial interest to maintain trade at the highest level we can afford.
We must remember, too, that some of our friends in Europe, and I refer here particularly to the French, have their own critical balance of payments problems here and now and look to this country as a traditional market for their staple exports, such as wines. In these circumstances, it is our wish, but also wise in view of present disequilibrium in Europe, to avoid further severe cuts in our imports from those sources.
Yet we have to plan to live within our means. The Government have therefore decided to withdraw the Open General Licences for a further list of selected goods so as to bring the trade under control. The extent to which this control will have to be exercised depends on how our position develops. This list has been prepared by careful selection in the light of the needs of our European friends as well as our own. Particulars of the goods brought under control will be published tonight by the Board of Trade. Goods already on their way to us will be admitted freely, and wherever goods are the subject of firm contracts already entered into, we shall issue the necessary licences. Arrangements for the issue of licences for new business will be worked out during the next few weeks.
The effect then, the Committee will wish to know, of all the various import cuts we have made, which will amount to about another £100 million, will be to reduce the value of our imports in


1952 from all sources, assuming that prices are much the same as they were at the beginning of the year, to about £3,150 million. This is a reduction of about 10 per cent. on the value of imports in the year 1951, and of over 15 per cent. on the annual rate in the second half of 1951. I give these figures specifically because there appears to be some doubt about the basis of the previous cuts.
At the same time, to deal with this emergency, we propose two further steps. We are suspending for the present the issue of duty-free licences, under Section 10 of the Finance Act, 1932, for the import of machinery. No applications posted after today will be considered. This is another emergency measure. We recognise that there is a long-term problem here, and we propose to examine it, in consultation with industry.

PURCHASE TAX AND UTILITY

Secondly, we propose to remove an obstacle which up to now has stood in the way of the full development of our export trade, particularly in the vital field of textiles. We shall do this by accepting the main recommendation of the Report of the Committee under the Chairmanship of Sir William Douglas. As this Committee was appointed by my predecessor, its parentage, chairmanship and membership is therefore presumably above reproach. Its Report, which was unanimous, puts forward a means of meeting the most frequent criticism made by exporters about the Purchase Tax arrangements in the utility field.

This arises from the fact that the main demand at home has been for utility grades, which have enjoyed complete tax exemption. An article which is just too expensive to qualify as utility has had practically no sale at home because of the big jump in the retail price caused by the addition of the tax. But many such articles, the Douglas Committee was assured, would command a ready sale abroad, if there were also sufficient home demand to make their production an economic proposition.

The effect of the new scheme is to remove the sudden jump in price and to substitute an evenly graduated tax. The scheme will remove a serious handicap under which our exporters have been labouring. It will also fulfil our international obligations and carry out an

undertaking given in Geneva by the ex-President of the Board of Trade, the right hon. and learned Member for St. Helens (Sir H. Shawcross), in September last year. We are, therefore, seeking continuity of policy and pledge in this matter. At the same time, the great range of cheaper utility goods will remain untaxed.

I am taking the opportunity to make a further improvement on the present arrangements, in order to help farm and other workers as well as housewives. Certain goods, including such essential items as rubber boots, oil baize and a wide range of industrial protective clothing have hitherto been outside the utility schemes and have, therefore, been subject to Purchase Tax. I am now bringing them into the new scheme, with the result that on many of them no tax at all will be payable, while on the rest it will be reduced.

My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade will enlarge on these matters in the Budget debates, and will describe his plans for the future of utility. As far as I am concerned the alterations in Purchase Tax are unlikely to raise any additional revenue this year.

These measures—the further import cuts and the other proposals I have just announced—form part of the third instalment of our emergency plan to reach our objective—balance with the non-sterling world in the second half of 1952. But this is not enough. We have felt the first rush of the storm and to lighten the ship we have had to throw a good deal overboard. We must now look to our rig and take in some sail.

EFFECT ON INTERNAL ECONOMY

In other words, we must divert some resources from use at home. It is customary in most Budget speeches to go deeply into economics and if I do not do that it may partly be through a lack of ability and training such as was so ably shown by my predecessor. But it may also be because, after a great deal of labour, I have attempted to try to put this section, which, if it were a symphony, might be regarded as the intellectual section of the piece, in what economists call "real terms," namely, a description of how we stand with regard to our resources.

I must emphasise at the outset that, although this means an attempt to


measure statistically the various elements in the equation we have to consider, the figures can be no more than estimates, and the final result, as indeed it should be with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, is an act of judgment. In order to carry out our balance of payments objective, it will be necessary for us to free resources sufficient to improve the United Kingdom's overall balance on current account, excluding defence aid from the United States, by at least £600 million in 1952–53 compared with 1951–52. In terms of money—and these are terms of money—the task looks enormous. It is, but the Committee should realise its actual size is not so great as some commentators have thought.

We can count, after all, on some improvement in our net invisible earnings, from shipping, insurance, oil and so forth which have always been and must always be a vital feature of British prosperity. I think it fair to assume that the terms of trade will be, as at present, more favourable than in the year just ending. These two factors should help us financially to the extent of between £200 and £250 million and their contribution can be deducted from the financial task.

Mr. Hugh Gaitskell: Will the right hon. Gentleman give the amount for each of them?

Mr. Butler: If the right hon. Gentleman will read carefully what I have said he will see the ratio of the two. I cannot give the actual figures for the earnings of shipping, oil and insurance. I should say myself that the invisibles would be about £150 million. The remainder—that is, £350 million to £400 million at 1951–52 prices—represents the volume of the resources we must devote, in the coming year, to our balance of payments objective.
I must deal first with imports. The volume of imports will be heavily reduced, by more than £300 million. In 1951–52, as the Committee knows, the stock of imported supplies increased greatly; in 1952–53 there is likely to be some fall in stocks overall. The result is that the volume of imports available for use in 1952–53 will be about £150 million less than in 1951–52.
In addition, we shall have to provide for a net increase of about £50 million

in the volume of exports. Some may think that this is a small figure. But we must remember that our exports of consumer goods to the sterling area will probably decline. Australia has just decided on a sharp cut in imports from us, particularly of consumer goods, as a consequence of the combined plan for bringing the sterling area into balance. As part of the general plan we ourselves must sell very much more than before in non-sterling markets. This means supplying what those markets want, at the price, and at the time, they want.
At present, one of the strongest demands is for capital goods—the products of our metal-using industries. These are precisely the products which it is most difficult for us to spare, but which we must spare if we are to export and balance our payments. It means a tremendous task for our exporters. We must do everything in our power to help them and so safeguard the employment of our people.
I have now given the Committee the main factors on the external side. A big decline in imports, offset, however, to a substantial extent by a change in the stock position: some expansion in total exports, which will involve a very large expansion in non-sterling markets for which so far as we can we must try to find more capital goods. And this in the face of a decline in exports of consumer goods to sterling area markets.
The Committee should realise it, and the country should understand that this will mean a really major diversion of effort if we are to survive and pay our way. The precise magnitude of all these changes is, of course, very uncertain. But I believe that, on balance, we shall have to make do, for other uses at home, with a volume of resources about £200 million less than last year.
The next claim is the defence programme. This will take a greater volume of resources in the coming year. The instalment originally planned for the year would have put a very heavy burden on the metal-using industries, and this has had to be adjusted. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has recently given a very full review of the state and prospects of this programme, and of the adjustments that have already been made.
These adjustments will increase our ability to export metal goods. All that I need say now is that, taking defence as a whole, I judge that the effect of the programme embodied in the Estimates—to which I shall shortly be turning—will be to increase the claim upon resources in the coming year by over £200 million. So that is, in resources, £200 million for the balance of payments over £200 million for defence; over £400 million in all. That is the total, so far, of the additional claims on our resources. I do not think we can hope to meet all this out of an increase in production at home.
Between 1950 and 1951 the national output increased by about £250 million at constant prices. But towards the end of the year production was severely hampered by the shortage of steel. Before long we shall have extra supplies of steel from the United States. This should enable the upward movement to be resumed. It is more than usually hazardous to estimate the increase this year, when we are faced with the task of finding alternative markets for a substantial volume of exports. We must work for an increase in volume of about the same or more than last year. My Budget, when it is revealed in full, is designed to help us get this.
But this alone will not fill the gap. We must, therefore, reduce our claims at home. One of these is Government civil expenditure, which we have cut significantly. In terms of resources this claim, thanks to the economies we have made, will be over £50 million less than last year. Next comes the claim of investment, and particularly investment in plant and machinery. This is a most important field. In the long run our factories must have the equipment they need for expansion and the improvement of efficiency. But in view of the overriding need for exports of precisely those goods where the investment demand is heaviest—namely engineering products—we must take decisive steps to reduce home investment substantially.
The late Government tried more than once by physical controls and fiscal measures to check home investment; but they always failed in the face of the overwhelming monetary demand. The world will not believe that we are serious in our determination to leave no weapon

unused to promote exports and defend the pound unless in this field we take action that is, and is seen to be, decisive.

MONETARY POLICY

Events have justified the monetary policy adopted last November. But the time has now come when a reinforcement of that policy is necessary to support our other measures. Accordingly, the Bank of England have today, with my approval, raised the Bank rate from 2½ per cent. to 4 per cent. This is a sharp upward movement and will, I am sure, show to the world that we not only recognise the very serious situation of the country but are determined to deal with it by whatever firm measures may be necessary, however unwelcome they may be. This rise to a comparatively high level of money rates is, I believe, in present circumstances, an essential part of our campaign to fortify the currency. It will play an important part in our effort to improve our balance of payments. One of the surest ways to make sterling stronger is to make it scarcer, and that is what we intend to do.

Further, if that policy is to be successful, we cannot, in present circumstances, afford to be more generous in giving credit to traders outside the United Kingdom than is strictly justified by our various overseas interests. Action is being taken in various ways; one example was the recent reduction of the normal term of acceptance credits from 120 days to the pre-war term of 90 days: and for similar reasons it is proposed to restrict re-finance facilities.

Internally, the general effect of this rise in Bank rate should be a further reminder to both lenders and borrowers of the need for caution and economy in our present circumstances. The various directives which I have issued requesting that, within the scope of a tighter credit policy, priority should be given to defence, exports, agricultural expansion, and so forth, will, of course, continue to stand.

I do not expect this rise to be popular, either in financial or industrial circles, or anywhere else. The use of the Bank rate—and I must remind the Committee of the position in which our country is in in regard to our resources—can make an important contribution towards the right economic climate, particularly towards


the diversion of resources from investment, above all, to export. I would console the Committee by reminding them that the Bank rate is a flexible instrument, and I give this assurance: it will be watched to ensure that its operation brings about conditions helpful to the strength of our economy. A healthy balance of payments is for our country the essential safeguard, in the long term, of the high and stable level of employment at which we all aim. The Bank rate will reinforce the other factors already operating to restrict investment at home—the suspension of the initial allowances introduced by the right hon. Member for Leeds, South (Mr. Gaitskell) as from next month, the physical controls over steel allocations, and the voluntary arrangements between the Ministry of Supply and Manufacturers to decide how much production should be devoted to the export trade.

I expect the cumulative effect of all these measures taken together to lead to a marked reduction in civil investment, particularly in plant and machinery, and in stocks. To some extent this may be offset by an increase in investment for defence and in building; but in total I have no doubt that we can confidently expect a marked contribution to the freeing of resources for our balance of payments. I am allowing for a saving of at least £100 million here, but in view of the great difficulty of exporting other goods, I hope we shall save even more.

GENERAL ECONOMIC CONCLUSION

We can now sum up. To meet the overriding needs of the balance of payments, and in the light of the probable trend of production, we have adjusted the defence programme, reduced our civil expenditure and have taken a series of steps to bring about a major decline in investment at home. It follows that even if we attain the same increase in production as last year no more than the same amount of resources as last year can be spared for the ordinary civil consumer at home. I judge that these changes in the distribution of our resources are both necessary and sufficient. It has been argued that we should make more severe and general cuts in consumption either instead of or in addition to the other cuts we are making. The account I have given of the external conditions facing us,

especially in the sterling area, will explain why I have rejected this conclusion. The savings in resources which I have described are those which will contribute most effectively to increasing our exports.

Many industries producing consumer goods are already faced with a slack demand at home. They now face further very severe cuts in their exports to the sterling area. They will have to increase substantially their exports to the non-sterling world—in difficult selling conditions—if they are to keep up their production and employment. To add to the difficulties of these industries by depressing home demand even further would result not in still higher exports, but in a further reduction of activity and employment, which we would all deplore. That is why I have come to the decision which I have just stated.

I now come to the crucial question for the general strategy of the Budget itself. If the home consumer is to have no more of our resources than last year, we must see to it that his purchasing power as a whole is no more than sufficient for this purpose. An important element in this is the general level of taxation. This brings me to the prospect for Government expenditure and revenue in the coming year.

GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE IN 1952–53

The estimated total of ordinary expenditure in 1952–53 is £4,240 million—that is £43 million more than the original Estimates for 1951–52 and £82 million more than the Estimates as revised after the last Budget. One half of this is attributable to the Debt Charge and other Consolidated Fund services. The increase of just over £40 million in Supply services consists of an increase of over £60 million in total net expenditure on defence preparations, offset by a net decline in civil expenditure of over £20 million.

I will devote a few moments to analysing these in turn. Under defence preparations I include, first, the Service Estimates, which stand at a net figure of £1,377 million. As the Committee are aware, this represents some slowing down compared with what was projected for the coming year under the original programme. The reasons for this were fully explained to the House by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, and I need not elaborate them now. To this figure of £1,377 million we must add Civil Defence


at just over £45 million, giving a total so far of nearly £1,425 million, an increase of £130 million over the current year's Estimates and margin for supplementaries.

Assistance for the development of industrial capacity in connection with defence stands at £65 million compared with £48 million in the last Budget, but the provision for strategic stockpiling is reduced from £143 million to £61 million in the current year. The reasons for which we have reluctantly had to take these decisions are only too well known to hon. Members. This gives us a total of about £1,550 million for defence preparations in the broad sense, and shows a net increase of over £60 million on the figure, under £1,490 million, provided for 1951–52.

I turn now to civil expenditure. Miscellaneous supply and trading services, for which I have provided £94 million, are up on the last Budget by £30 million; this is accounted for by the Post Office cash deficit of £14 million, increased civil expenditure by the Ministry of Supply and changes in the stocks and debtor-creditor position of the Ministry of Food. The Exchequer contribution to the National Insurance Fund, at £69 million, takes credit for a full year's reduction in that contribution and is, therefore, down by another £40 million. That leaves me with the remainder of our ordinary expenditure—that is, the normal civil expenditure to which I have directed the attention of hon. Members during our two previous debates on the subject, and to which our efforts at economy have been mainly devoted.

I told the House on 29th January that we were holding this expenditure at about this year's figure, and we have done so. The figure is £1,903 million, or just over £10 million less than the corresponding figure for the current year, and that despite a considerable rise in costs.

It is worth looking a little more closely at these figures, which can be divided into social services, food subsidies, the balance of ordinary civil expenditure and so forth. The social services stand at £1,471 million, against this year's revised estimates of £1,454 million—£17 million more. The National Health Service, at £393 million, excluding the Civil Defence part of it, is down by £5 million. Education, including universities, is up by nearly £8 million at £259 million. This,

I hope, is a sufficient answer to those who consider that I am leading a drive towards illiteracy, or engaged in cutting the throat of a child of my own creation.

The other social services at £819 million, are up by £14 million. Most of this increase is due to a rise in Exchequer contributions to local revenues and to the increased National Assistance rates announced last year. The balance of civil expenditure, comprising every kind of service, is down. It stands at £432 million, a reduction of over £30 million.

Sir Waldron Smithers: Not enough.

Mr. Butler: Perhaps my hon. Friend would take account of some of the other economies to which I have been referring and will add up the figures afterwards.
This is a definite achievement, even greater in real terms because of the increased prices that have occurred since last year. It has not been done solely by the few big measures which have been separately mentioned to the House, or by the disappearance of items such as the Festival of Britain. In every sector there has been a deliberate cutting back of services, at the cost of many sacrifices, I agree, in the general interest—coast protection, new Government works, grants-in-aid to many useful bodies, are only a few examples chosen at random. And to keep this up we need a sustained effort to put economy first: an effort which my colleagues have agreed to make, and in which I ask all local authorities and other public bodies to share to the full. I cannot stress sufficiently the importance of economy in the sphere of local government as well as national Government.

REVENUE IN 1952–53

Against this, I estimate that at current tax rates the total revenue will be £4,778 million, an increase of £338 million over the estimated out-turn of the current year. The increase is more than accounted for by Inland Revenue duties which, at £2,800 million, will yield about £430 million more than this year's expected out-turn. The yield of the Income Tax next year I put at £1,980 million, an increase of nearly £300 million. This is due in part to the big increase in company profits which occurred in 1951 and will come under charge to Income Tax in 1952, and in part to the higher level of the wage and salary bill. The suspension of the


initial allowances, which operates from 6th April next, will not affect the tax payable in the coming year. The Profits Tax will also show a big increase in yield in 1952–53, resulting partly from the increase in company profits and partly from the increase to 50 per cent, in the distributed rate of Profits Tax made in the last Budget. I put the yield at £460 million, an increase of about £150 million.

The revenue from the Customs and Excise duties, on the other hand, I put at £1,750 million, about the same figure as for the present year. The principal items in the total for 1952–53 are: tobacco, no less than £605 million; beer and other alcoholic drinks, £394 million; Purchase Tax, £340 million; oil, £205 million; Import Duties Act, £80 million; Entertainments Duty, £47 million; and betting, £26 million. Since practically no revenue is expected next year from surplus stores, and considerably less from surplus receipts of trading services, the net increase in total revenue is reduced to' about £338 million.

Taking revenue and expenditure together, this means that I expect an "above the line" surplus, on the conventional basis of accounting, of no less than £538 million. On the alternative classification the surplus is £687 million, compared with £603 million on the provisional out-turn of the current year.

THE BUDGET SURPLUS

The accounts then show another big surplus in prospect. The question which the Committee will want answered is, should I increase it, should I reduce it, or should I leave it broadly as it is? The answer depends, as the Committee knows, on a proper assessment of what taxation has got to do. Its job is not merely to balance the Government's expenditure. It has a part to play in so regulating the purchasing power available to the community as a whole that this purchasing power does not outrun the amount of goods and services available.

My previous conclusion was that in order to achieve our objectives, no more than the same amount of resources as last year can be spared for the ordinary civil consumer at home. The question now is whether I need take action by way of taxation to prevent consumers seeking

to buy in the coming year more than they have done this year.

I propose to give the Committee only the bare outline of the considerations which I have taken into account. As everyone knows, consumer goods already cost a good deal more than they did a year ago. This means about another £400 million more on the bill for the same amount of goods and services. Incomes, of course, have risen too, but I judge that if I leave the Budget surplus broadly where it is, the money people will have to spend in the coming year will, for reasons I have already given, only be just about enough to pay for the goods that are likely to be available if exports expand as we hope.

I have not allowed for any great increase in personal saving in the coming year. But I should like to stress the importance of National Savings. The fine work done by all members of the National Savings Movement is recognised by all Members of the Committee. I believe in savings, and I think the Committee believe in savings. I believe that what I am doing will give the Movement a great new opportunity, of which I hope it and its distinguished Chairman and members will take advantage.

GENERAL BUDGETARY CONCLUSION

Let me now sum up my proposals as far as we have got. In order to achieve our balance of payments objective and meet the needs of defence we have to reduce Government civil expenditure, cut back sharply on civil investment and make do with no more for personal consumption than last year. To prevent consumption increasing I must keep the Budget surplus substantially unchanged.

It is on this foundation that I shall base my Budget proposals; and with full recognition of the fact that high Government expenditure accompanied by high taxation themselves have an inflationary effect. In this country of ours commitments have been piled on commitments, and taxation has been raised to the ceiling. This country has taken on far too much at once, as everybody who looks at us from outside would agree. So, if this Budget is to fulfil its main function—to restore confidence in the pound—it must further reduce Government expenditure and make a significant start in reducing taxation. If I am


successful, a Chancellor from now on will have more room for manoeuvre and will not find the economy crammed right up against the ceiling.

I am, therefore, asking that the nation should throw off some of its crippling load of expenses and taxes, and should go into action with its loins girt, inspired by the sense that if we work harder we can earn more, or that if we are in need or reach old age we shall be cared for. We must also be satisfied that the rewards of effort are fair, and that undue profits are not made out of the nation's necessities. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] Fortified by that support from both sides of the Committee, I now approach the aspect of the question to which I turn first, namely, the profits which are being made by certain sections of the community as a result of the defence programme.

EXCESS PROFITS TAX

I have already made it plain, that it is our intention that an Excess Profits Tax should operate from 1st January of this year. At a time like this sacrifices should be equally borne. We are not prepared to see excessive profits being made as a result of the injection of rearmament into the economy. The new tax, which I propose to call the Excess Profits Levy to distinguish it from the Excess Profits Tax of the last war, will be general in its application and not confined to concerns on armament contracts. Details of the new levy will appear in the Financial Statement. I will, therefore, confine myself to giving the Committee a brief outline of the main provisions we propose, but before doing so I must tell the Committee at once that I propose to simplify the new levy and to avoid the delay, complications and waste of manhours involved in the old E.P.T.

The levy will apply to companies and other bodies, and will not extend to individuals and partnerships, who have to pay Surtax as well as Income Tax, which. I think, can well look after their problem. The new levy will be charged on the amounts by which current profits exceed standard profits. The normal standard will be the average of the profits of the three years 1947, 1948 and 1949. I am not prepared to bring into the average the profits of 1950, and still

less those of 1951. The profits of both these years were inflated by the events following the outbreak of the Korean war.

If the profits of any one or two of the standard years were unduly low the company may instead bring into the average 8 per cent. on its paid up share capital. If the profits of all three standard years were unduly low, the company may take 10 per cent. on its paid up share capital. For new businesses set up after the middle of the standard period, the standard will be 10 per cent. on the paid up share capital. For director-controlled companies an additional 2 per cent. will be given. There will be a minimum standard of £2,000.

During the last war the Excess Profits Tax was allowed as a deduction in computing the Income Tax profits. This meant that the Income Tax assessments could not be settled until the Excess Profits Tax had been determined. I now propose to impose the new levy at net rates and not as a deduction in computing Income Tax profits.

During the last war the Excess Profits Tax was charged for the greater part of the period at 100 per cent. As, however, the E.P.T. paid was allowed as a deduction in computing the profits for Income Tax purposes, for every £100 paid in E.P.T. there was a reduction of £50 in the Income Tax bill. The same result would, therefore, have been achieved had the E.P.T. been imposed at 50 per cent., and no deduction allowed in computing the Income Tax profits. This is the line that I would propose taking on the present occasion.

At the end of the war the rate of the old E.P.T. was reduced by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bishop Auckland (Mr. Dalton) to 60 per cent. gross, which is equal to 30 per cent. net. I am glad to find one example of the right hon. Gentleman which I can follow. In my opinion this is the right rate at which to charge an Excess Profits Levy in peace-time—particularly having regard to the effect of a 100 per cent. E.P.T. in encouraging waste and extravagance. I propose, therefore, that the new Excess Profits Levy should be charged at 30 per cent. net.

To meet cases of hardship, I propose that a ceiling should be placed on the Excess Profits Levy chargeable. This


ceiling will be 18 per cent, of the total profits; in other words, the Excess Profits Levy payable will be 30 per cent. of the excess profits, or 18 per cent. of the total profits, whichever is the less. [An HON. MEMBER: "Far too low."] Wait a minute.

During the last war, if the Excess Profits Tax was payable the Profits Tax ceased to be charged. We cannot be so generous this time. It would, however, be asking too much that industry should carry the Excess Profits Levy in addition to the Profits Tax at the present very high rates. I propose, therefore, that some compensating reduction should be made in the Profits Tax as a corollary of the introduction of the Levy. The present rates of 10 per cent. on the reserve and 50 per cent. on the dividend are equivalent, approximately, to net rates of 5 per cent. and 25 per cent. respectively.

I propose to reduce these rates to 2½ per cent. net and 17½ per cent. net. Profits Tax at these new rates will not be deductible in computing Income Tax profits. I have loaded the reduction, as the Committee may observe, in favour of those who increase their reserves. Thus we fulfil the promise we gave in our Election statement to reduce the tax on profits ploughed back into the business.

I can now sum up my proposals in this way. I do not think that they will disappoint hon. Members. On its standard profits a company will, from 1st January, pay 50 per cent., that is, Income Tax at 47½ per cent., together with Profits Tax at 2½ per cent. On any sums distributed it will pay an additional 15 per cent. (that is, the difference between the 17½ per cent. and the 2½ per cent.). On its Excess Profits it will pay 80 per cent., that is, Income Tax at 47½ per cent., together with Profits Tax at 2½ per cent., together with Excess Profits Levy at 30 per cent. On any sums distributed it will pay an additional 15 per cent.

The effect of the overriding maximum will be to ensure that in the case, for example, where one-third of the profit is distributed, the total tax bill—that is Income Tax, Profits Tax and Excess Profits Levy combined, will not exceed 73 per cent. of the total profit.

I think the Committee will agree that we are thus virtually taking away any

excess profits made. Thus we ensure that companies will adopt a very cautious policy on dividends.

Taking account of the compensating reductions I have proposed in the Profits Tax, the net additional yield of these proposals will be about £100 million in a full year. The yield in the coming financial year will be small, about £1 million only.

Mr. Gaitskell: Is that over and above last year, or over and above what this year would have been apart from this?

Mr. Butler: This is over and above any previous total reached. It is an extra additional taxation of £100 million, extra to what we had before.
No definite time limit can be announced for the operation of the Levy, but it must continue during the period of the emergency. The proposal I have just made is designed to be just, and to produce a considerable revenue next year.

MINOR REFORMS

Before I consider how we can raise or save some money this year there are a number of minor reforms to be mentioned. The Finance Bill will, in any case, be very long this year, and so I cannot do as much as I should have liked. I have, therefore, been able to take only the most urgent of the recommendations from the Report of the Millard Tucker Committee.

For example, United Kingdom mining ventures in the Colonies and elsewhere overseas will be helped in various ways. Businesses will be able to set off losses against subsequent profits without time limit. Brewers will no longer get a special deduction for tax purposes when they let tied houses for less than their full value. I am also revising the arrangements for relief from Estate Duty on the estates of members of the Forces. The present distinction between lower and higher ranks is quite unjustifiable. My proposal is to treat all ranks alike and, broadly speaking, to give total exemption from Estate Duty in time of war or in warlike operations and no relief at all in time of peace.

Another small matter. Stamp duty on conveyances of small property other than stocks or marketable securities will be reduced. Where the price does not exceed £3,000 the duty will be reduced to


1 per cent. and where the price lies between £3,000 and £3,450 there will be some relief from the 2 per cent. now chargeable. Further, the relief from surtax granted to Lloyd's in 1949 will be extended, anomalies relating to allowances for plant, machinery and patents will be removed, and the taxation position of radio relay companies and bodies such as the British Wool Marketing Board will be dealt with.

A technical defect in the law on Surtax will be corrected. A gap in our defences against avoidance of Estate Duty will be closed. An ingenious method of avoiding Pool Betting Duty will be stopped. A hardship arising from the method of assessing certain types of investment income will be relieved. The net effect of all these minor reforms is a loss of about £2 million in 1952–53. and about £4 million in a full year.

ENTERTAINMENTS DUTY

As for the Entertainments Duty, we have just completed the review which hon. Members asked for last year, and I should like to thank everyone who has helped us with it. I am specially grateful to the cinema industry for the ingenious scheme they have put forward. Unfortunately from my point of view, it had two major defects—it cost several million pounds and would have meant increasing expenditure on American films.

One of the main points in last year's debates concerned speedway racing—which together with other racing up to now has paid the full rates, although other sports have the advantage of the reduced rate. I shall deal with this in the following way. I now propose a new scale, in between the two present ones for all kinds of sport. In general, it will be rather less than half way between the present scales, and will give real relief to sports now on the full scale including speedway racing. I hope that admission prices can now be reduced. I am afraid it means, of course, that sports, such as football and cricket, which are now on the lower scale and have been getting it for some time, will have to cost a bit more. The reductions in duty will operate from 30th March, but the increase will not start until 31st August.

Finally, I must close a loophole in the Finance Act, 1946, and make it quite clear that music hall and other variety enter-

tainments do not get the exemption intended for educational activities. I hope that it will not be said that by taxing music for the millions I am cutting education. This amendment will come into force tomorrow. The proposals as a whole will cost me about £250,000 in a full year, but this year, because I am giving the relief before I take the increase, they will cost £500,000.

POST OFFICE CHARGES

I now turn to certain minor sources of revenue for this year. My noble Friend the Postmaster-General, in order to balance his accounts and also to assist me, has found it necessary to increase certain Post Office charges. Increasing costs mean that without some advance in charges the Commercial Accounts for next year would show a deficit. There will be increased charges for certain inland and overseas postal services, some increases in postal order poundages, as well as higher charges for certain telephone and telegraphic services. The details of all these, including the dates on which they will come into operation, will be found in the White Paper.

I need only say that no change is proposed in the 2½d. letter or the 6d. air letter. Further than the changes shown in the White Paper, it is the intention of the Postmaster-General, following the recent increase in railway freight rates, to raise inland parcel post rates. In all, these changes in the tariffs for Post Office services, apart from the parcel post rates, will bring in a cash revenue of £9,635,000 in the forthcoming year and in a full year they should produce about £13,800,000.

OIL

I now come to some major proposals. While budgeting for a large surplus I yet wish to finance certain important changes which the Government conceive to be in the interest of those large sections of the people, who, by their increased efforts, can increase national production or who have reached the end of their life's work or have been or are incapacitated or hindered by disability, sickness, injury or unemployment.

I have only one tax increase to propose and that is on oil. Since the main objective of the Budget is to relieve our balance of payments difficulties I must pay particular attention to a scarce product which costs us foreign exchange.


As I said in January, I have considered and rejected petrol rationing. I propose instead to raise by 7½d. a gallon the Customs duty on petrol and other light oils and on heavy oil used as road fuel. The duty at present stands at Is. 10½d. a gallon. The increase will apply to any oils of this kind which become chargeable with duty from 6 p.m. today. The retail price of petrol, at present selling at 3s. 7½d. a gallon, will thus be raised to 4s. 3d. a gallon. The new maximum prices, including the extra duty, will become effective at the garages after midnight tonight. I have a good deal more to say so I hope that hon. Members will not hurry out.

Indigenous light oils and heavy oils used in road vehicles are already given a preference of 9d. a gallon. It is proposed to continue this preference. The duty on indigenous oils of this category will, therefore, be raised by 7½d. a gallon at the same time. There will be corresponding adjustments in the rates on petrol substitutes and power methylated spirits. The extra revenue from this change is estimated at £66 million in a full year and the same amount in 1952 to 1953.

MOTOR VEHICLE DUTIES

I propose, at the same time, to meet a claim of motorists which has been urged by hon. Members upon each of my predecessors since 1947; that is, I intend to abolish the anomalous assessment of licence duty on the older private cars on the basis of their horsepower rating. The only reason for this survival was the loss of revenue which it avoided. This was estimated at between £5 million and £6 million pounds, and the latest revised estimate is £7 million. I do not think anyone will suppose that I can or should afford such a loss. I therefore propose that there shall be a flat rate for all cars, and that this be increased from £10 to £12 10s. a year.

I do not think this increase on the rate originally fixed in the very different conditions of 1947 is excessive. I recognise that owners of the small number of cars of 7 horsepower or less registered before 1947 will face a somewhat larger increase; but they have been fortunate in enjoying for so long the benefit of their

anomalous position. I have reflected, also, that they use less petrol. These charges, as is customary, will come into force on 1st January, 1953; they could not be brought into force earlier without gross inequities as between those who have already taken out licences for the whole of 1952 and others. I estimate that they will cost £850,000 in 1952 to 1953 and £1,300,000 in a full year.

FOOD SUBSIDIES

I now proceed with my other proposals. In our statement of policy published last October we undertook to review the subsidies and other methods of paying out the public's money so that those in the greatest need get the most benefit. This review has been carried out. In that same statement of policy we pointed out how our economy was being distorted by large food subsidies to all and sundry, irrespective of their need. We said that we should like to simplify the immensely complicated system operating at present and substitute for it methods which supplement the personal incomes of those most hit by living costs, whether by family allowances or differential rates of taxation.

I should on some grounds have liked to have postponed any action about the food subsidies until we had had more time to grapple with the severe economic problems of the time. But the very intensity of our situation makes it essential to lighten the burden on the economy to bring back the sense of reality to which I have referred.

Hon. Members are probably familiar with the history of these subsidies. During the war, they were of modest amount and served a clearly defined and measurable objectively, namely, to hold the cost of living index practically steady. After the war, the amount necessary to meet this objective rose rapidly. Moreover, the objective itself became unattainable when the scope of the index was revised and a substantial number of items of expenditure were included. There were variations which could not be controlled by subsidy. My predecessors, therefore, were faced with the necessity of introducing the principle of restricting the food subsidies each year to specified ceilings. In his 1949 Budget, Sir Stafford Cripps spoke of a prospective rise of


subsidies from £485 million to £568 million, and said:
That just cannot go on. We must call a halt … Prices have got out of all relationship with realities.—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 6th April, 1949; Vol. 463, c. 2085.]
And that is exactly what I say today. I do not think we can justify any longer our present level of expenditure on subsidising food. We subsidise everyone, whether in need of help or not. In our statement of policy we said that we subsidised Cabinet Ministers. I was not sure when this was written that I would appear in this capacity or in the position in which I now find myself. We subsidise the staple foods not only when they are consumed in the ordinary forms, but when they are ingredients in expensive luxuries.

We must try to direct our assistance to the places where it is really needed. Besides, this heavy expenditure contributes to the need for a high level of taxation, so high as to leave no room for manoeuvre when we want to make any change. Harder working and higher earning by those who could contribute to the extra production are discouraged in present circumstances.

The subsidies mean—I repeat again the words of Sir Stafford Cripps—"prices out of all relationship with realities." The subsidies conceal from the consumer the real cost of what we have to pay in exports for the foods we import. As a result people tend to spend a large part of their incomes on the non-essentials of life.

Part of the object of this Budget is to restore a sense of reality to our personal as well as our national accounts. I am not proposing any increase in taxes on tobacco or liquor, partly for the reason that these are now at such a height that the law of diminishing returns may show signs of beginning to operate. So I must leave it to the individual so to arrange his or her own personal budget to meet the extra costs involved by this national Budget. If they insist on smoking I shall get the revenue; if not, they will have more to spend on food.

Before I put my actual proposals to the Committee, I must remind hon. Members that the subsidy figure in the estimates I have already described is £410 million. As was the experience of my predecessors, some price increases would be necessary to bring the subsidies down

to this figure. There have been and are in prospect some rises in the cost of imported foods not yet covered, and also we must take account of the current annual review of the prices of home produced foods. Naturally, while the negotiations on the latter are in progress, I cannot give a precise figure, but something of the order of £50 million may be required for the whole of these uncovered matters.

Now for my actual proposals. It is now proposed to make such increases of prices as may prove necessary to bring the food subsidy figure down to a rate of £250 million a year. This will be the new ceiling when the increases of prices are in full operation. I must warn the Committee that a wide range of increases will be necessary, and in the course of making them we shall try to eliminate altogether the subsidy on some foods, thus securing a measure of simplification. The price of the 1¾ lb. loaf will be increased by 1½d. from 16th March and there will be an increase from the same date of 1¼d. per lb. of flour.

As a result of reducing the subsidy the price of meat will be increased by an average of 4d. a lb. at an early date. The reduction of 1d. a quart in the price of milk which was due to be made seasonally at the end of March will not now be made and there will be a seasonal increase of 1d. a quart later in the year. The price of tea will be put up to a level which will eliminate subsidy altogether but this will not come into force until the summer.

Hon. Members: How much?

Mr. Butler: Perhaps the Committee will allow me to go on with my statement?
Increases of prices of other subsidised foods will be made over the next few months. They will be announced in due course by my right hon. and gallant Friend the Minister of Food and will extend to fats, cheese, butter, sugar, bacon and eggs. No change will be made in the arrangement for subsidised school milk, and cheap or free milk for nursing mothers and young children.
It is impossible to calculate exactly what the total effect of all these changes will be. This is the main sacrifice for which this Budget calls, and I should, therefore, like to be as clear as possible


and to put my figures high rather than low. This extra cost may well average out at about 1s. 6d. per week per head of population.
I now turn to the other side of the operation, by which it is the Government's wish and my particular desire to help those whose needs are greatest.

NATIONAL ASSISTANCE

The ultimate protection against want in this country is National Assistance. I have no doubt that the National Assistance Board will take cognisance of my proposals on food subsidies and will make appropriate recommendations to the Government in due course. I cannot anticipate what they will propose. But I do not intend that compensatory actions for the steps I have just announced should be limited to this ultimate recourse against want.

I therefore come to the first congenial task which has fallen to my lot since I became Chancellor—that is to allot to my colleagues principally concerned sufficient funds to carry out some much-needed reforms.

NATIONAL INSURANCE

First, I turn to the sphere of the Minister of National Insurance. I have already referred to welfare milk and school milk. Besides this protection to parents in the interests of their children, it is proposed to increase the family allowance from 5s. a week to 8s. a week on the same basis as the present Act, namely, to children in the family after the first. The cost will be some £37 million in a full year. Thus a family with two children only will receive an extra 3s. and this will cover extra costs of food for the children. As families are larger so will the benefit very rapidly spread in the interests of the family as a whole. Thus we fulfil the undertaking given in our policy statement that in redistributing public money to those in need we would use the method of family allowances.

I come now to the National Insurance scheme, which circumstances of today would call us in any case to revise. We are already pledged to consider the needs of old age pensioners. There are differences of rates between pensioners over 70 and under. There are differences of opinion about the value of this

particular method adopted by my predecessor to give incentives to those over 65 to stay at work. Indeed, ideas—and they are not confined to one side of the Committee or the other—vary about the relative value of the different forms of encouragement which might be given to encourage longer working.

In view of these very real difficulties, to which a great deal of time and thought has been given, and of the important social issues involved, my right hon. Friend the Minister of National Insurance has made a request that he should be given time to enter into discussions at once with both sides of industry with a view to working out proposals which he will present to the House. I feel sure he will benefit by the advice of the Trades Union Congress. There are many problems, and the committees should not rush into decisions without proper advice.

I have asked the Minister to take as a measure of what we can afford uniform benefits of 32s. 6d. for a single person and 54s. for a married couple and the appropriate increase of contributions—the increases for employers and employees would be 7½d. each for men per week and 5½d. for women. The contribution income from employers and workers would be about equal to the increase at the outset in the amount of benefits, though, of course, as the Committee are probably aware the cost of pension benefits rises steadily as time goes on, and the contribution income remains about constant.

If I take account of the saving of National Assistance on the one hand and of the loss of Income Tax on the contributions on the other, the change involves a burden on the budget and the Insurance Fund taken together of about £10 million a year in the early years. This, in round terms, is the material which I have asked my right hon. Friend to use in building up his scheme.

WAR PENSIONS

I now wish to respond to appeals made to me by the Minister of Pensions. I accept his view that war pensions should be increased on the basis of a rise of 10s. a week in disability pension for 100 per cent. disablement, with pro rata increases to cover degrees of disablement less than 100 per cent. The standard basic rate will thus be increased from 45s. to 55s.


a week. There will also be some increases for war widows, and my hon. Friend the Minister of Pensions will make an announcement in due course. The cost of these improvements will be approximately £10 million a year.

INDUSTRIAL INJURY BENEFITS

As regards industrial injury benefits, the Government propose to increase the basic rate by 10s., i.e., from 45s. to 55s. Here again we propose to give appropriate increases for widows. The cost of these improvements will be approximately £3 million a year. My right hon. Friend the Minister of National Insurance is working out the details and considering whether any extra contribution will be needed. He will make a statement in due course.

OTHER PENSIONS

There is another class of pensioner I have had to think about—that is the public service pensioner—the retired school teacher, civil servant, local government officer, policeman, fireman and others, and also the long-service pensioner of Her Majesty's Forces. Some of these people were given some help under the Pensions (Increase) Acts of 1944 and 1947. But I am satisfied that the circumstances are such that some additional help is now called for. I am calling a conference of the authorities concerned to see what should be done. The measure of additional assistance should not, I consider, exceed 5s. to 7s. 6d. a week—say, up to a total of £20 a year.

INTERIM SUMMARY

The Committee will have noticed that the cost of some of the concessions I have mentioned depends on recommendations to be made to the Government and negotiations to be undertaken, and I cannot, therefore, give an absolutely firm figure for the total cost at this stage. I estimate, however, that the net total cost to the Budget and the Insurance Fund in a full year would be about £80 million. The cost, of course, would rise in future years with the rising cost of old age pensions.

Neither the saving on the food subsidies of £160 million nor the cost of the concessions of £80 million a year will be fully felt in 1952–53. I have already outlined the programme of reductions of the food subsidies. Having regard to the time for the necessary legislation and

other Parliamentary action which is required for most of the other side of the proposals—though we shall proceed both on this and on the preparatory administration with all speed—I put the combined effect of both sets of proposals in 1952–53 at the same figure as for the full year, namely, as giving me on balance a sum available of £80 million.

INCOME TAX

I now come to the last feature of the operation which I have undertaken. A true and lasting solution for our present troubles can be found only through increased production, harder work and in-increased output. It is by increased production and a new spirit of satisfaction in rewards well earned that we shall pull through. I am convinced that the present weight of direct taxation, particularly on the lower and middle income groups, acts as a very positive discouragement to extra effort.

We spoke of the need for differential rates of taxation in our policy statement. We must sweep irritations aside and make people feel that if they work harder they will be allowed to enjoy a proper reward for so doing. Austerity and restriction alone are not enough we must give positive encouragement if we are all to pull through together.

I propose, therefore, to make radical changes in the incidence of the Income Tax designed to lighten the burden of the tax, particularly on extra earnings, and thus to encourage people when they put in longer hours overtime or earn more by harder work. We must ensure that the tax works with, and not against, economic forces, and that it encourages rather than damps down people's natural aspirations.

The Income Tax in its present form suffers from three major defects: the starting points of liability are too low, the rates of tax are too high and the graduation is too steep. I propose to make a start this year in tackling these defects. I propose that the single allowance shall be increased from £110 to £120, the married allowance from £190 to £210 and the child allowance from £70 to £85. The earned income relief will be increased from the present one-fifth to two-ninths. I should have liked to have increased it to one-quarter, but I am afraid that this year I cannot afford to go as far as that.

The maximum of the allowance will go up from £400 to £450 at an income level of about £2,000. The professional classes need an incentive as much as any other. The present reduced rates, which take the form of charging the first £50 of taxable income at 3s. and the next £200 at 5s. 6d., will be replaced by an improved structure under which the first £100 will be charged at 3s., the next £150 at 5s. 6d. and the next £150 at 7s. 6d.

The effect of these proposals taken together will be to increase the starting point of liability on earned income for the single person from £2 17s. a week to £3 3s. a week; for the married person without children from £4 15s. a week to £5 8s. a week; for the married person with one child from £6 9s. a week to £7 10s. a week; and for the married person with two children from £8 3s. a week to £9 12s. a week. In this way, no fewer than two million people will be exempted from tax altogether.

The change in the reduced rates structure will mean that the standard rate will not now become payable until earnings reach £13 1s. a week for the single man; £15 6s. for the married man without children; £17 8s. for the married man with one child; and £19 10s. a week for the married man with two children. I have now so set these income levels that they will mean that in the great majority of cases overtime may freely be worked without risk of liability to tax at the standard rate.

If I may put the situation in a graphical form, I would refer to perhaps the most important person for the balance of payments in the country. A miner at the coal face, doing the hardest and most valuable work in the country, may curse the cuts of which he has been told a great deal, and yet, by more production, make extra earnings under this Budget which will recompense him several times over for any cuts made. I have carefully considered various suggestions which have been made from time to time for exempting overtime altogether from Income Tax, but so far no fair or practical way of doing this has been found. The proposal I have put forward, is, I think, the best way of ensuring that overtime is not unduly penalised for taxation purposes. I hope that this alone will provide a very

real and positive incentive to greater production.

The increase in the earned income relief will mean a reduction in the effective rates of tax charged on earned income, including overtime. Tables published in the White Paper will give figures to indicate the extent of the reduction in tax which will be given to single and married men under these proposals. The Committee will remember that the family man with children is already free of Income Tax worries in the lower ranges. He will get the benefit of the family allowances. Also, he will get some increasing degree of relief under these schemes once he and his family come within the present scale

As the tables in the White Paper show. I can count next year on a considerable increase in the revenue from the Excess Profits Levy and in other ways. I consider that we can well afford the £180 million which these reliefs will cost in the current year. The figure for a full year will be £228 million. For P.A.Y.E. deductions on the new scale will commence on the first pay day after 8th June.

There is one further relief I propose in the Income Tax field, designed primarily to help retired people and people living on small fixed incomes. Pensions already qualify for the earned income relief and will benefit from the increase in the rate to two-ninths. I propose to go further and do something special for small investment incomes which do not at present benefit from the earned income relief, and which do not qualify for the age relief because the taxpayer has not yet reached the age of 65. Many hon. Members who have relatives or friends living under these modest circumstances, whether they be retired, single or married, an aunt or cousin, a friend or neighbour, will surely welcome this simple act of grace.

I propose that, in future, all incomes below £250 a year shall receive the earned income relief, which will, of course, be at the new rate of two-ninths. There will be a marginal relief where the income slightly exceeds £250. The cost of this proposal, which represents a well-deserved measure of relief to people on whom the rise in the cost of living is bearing and will bear very hardly, will be £¼ million this year and £1 million in a full year.

GENERAL CONCLUSION

The final effect of all the changes I propose can be expressed thus: I hope to obtain in 1952–53 another £10 million from the Post Office, and £66 million extra from petrol. I hope also to save a net amount of about £80 million as the combined result of reducing the food subsidies but improving social benefits. This total of about £156 million is rather more than offset by the Income Tax reliefs, costing about £180 million; and, allowing also for the minor proposals which I have mentioned, the final surplus above the line, to which I drew the Committee's attention earlier, becomes about £510 million, slightly less than at the outset, but still, for the reasons which I have given, approximately the amount which the situation requires, and incidentally covering—as Sir Stafford Cripps taught us to do—the liabilities below the line in the conventional accounts. This, I think, is a thoroughly healthy and satisfactory conclusion.

This, then, is my Budget, necessary, I judge, to achieve our objectives in the year ahead, and also sufficient. But what is more, all its changes—the new revenue, and the savings from further economies—are being devoted to relieving hardship, reducing inequity and providing fresh incentives. Solvency, security, duty and incentive are our themes. Restriction and austerity are not enough. We want a system which offers us both more realism and more hope. These are the underlying purposes of the measures I have proposed, the deeper explanation of their character. We must now set forth, braced and resolute, to show the world that we shall regain our solvency and, with it, our national greatness.

CUSTOMS AND EXCISE

1. Hydrocarbon oils, etc. (Customs and Excise)

Resolved,
That as from six o'clock in the evening of the eleventh day of March, nineteen hundred and fifty-two, there shall be an increase of sevenpence halfpenny a gallon—

(a) in the rate of the duty of customs on hydrocarbon oils; and
(b) in each of the rates of the rebate allowed on the delivery for home consumption of hydrocarbon oils other than light oils;

and the rates of the excise duty and rebate on hydrocarbon oils and of the excise duties on

petrol substitutes and on spirits used for making power methylated spirits (which under sections two and three of the Finance Act, 1950, and section one of the Finance Act, 1951, depend on the rate of the customs duty on hydrocarbon oils) shall be increased accordingly.
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution should have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913.

2. Entertainments (Excise)

Resolved,
That—

(a) payments to which this paragraph applies for admission to racing, games and other sports or to entertainments which include items being racing, games or other sports and are such that apart from those items entertainments duty in respect of the entertainments would be chargeable at the reduced rates or would not be chargeable shall, instead of being chargeable to duty in some cases at the reduced rates and in other cases at the full rates, in all cases be chargeable at the following intermediate rates, that is to say—

Amount of payment
Rate of duty


Where the amount of the payment, excluding the amount of duty,—



exceeds 1s. and does not exceed 1s. 1½d.
1½d.


exceeds 1s. 1½d.
1½d. for the first 1s. 1½d. and ½d. for every 1d. or part of 1d. over 1s. 1½d.;

and this paragraph applies, in so far as it increases the rates of duty, to payments made on or after the twelfth day of March, nineteen hundred and fifty-two, for admission to entertainments held on or after the thirty-first day of August, nineteen hundred and fifty-two, and in so far as it reduces the rates of duty to payments (whenever made) for admission to entertainments held on or after the thirtieth day of March, nineteen hundred and fifty-two, and any necessary repayment of duty shall be made;

(b) payments made on or after the twelfth day of March, nineteen hundred and fifty-two, for admission to an entertainment held on or after that date shall not be exempted by section eight of the Finance Act, 1946, if the entertainment is a music-hall or other variety entertainment.

And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution should have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913.

3. Pool betting (Excise)

Resolved,
That the law relating to the pool betting duty shall be amended—

(a) as regards bets made by reference to any event taking place on or after the twenty-second day of March, nineteen hundred and fifty-two, by treating any bet as made by way of pool betting unless each of the persons making it knows or can know, at the time he makes it, the amount he will win, except in so far as that amount is to depend on the result of the event or events betted on, or on any such event taking place or producing a result, or on the numbers taking part in any such event, or on the starting prices or totalisator odds for any such event, or on there being totalisator odds for any such event, or on the time when his bet is received by any person with or through whom it is made ("starting prices" meaning for this purpose the odds ruling at the scene of the event immediately before the start, and "totalisator odds" the odds paid on bets made by means of a totalisator at the scene of the event); and
(b) as regards bets made by reference to events taking place after the commencement of any Act giving effect to this resolution, by making provision for cases where the winnings of a person making a bet consist or may consist in whole or in part of something other than money and by making provision for treating as stake money on a bet any payment entitling a person to make a bet (or to enter into a transaction which would be a bet if there were stake money besides that payment);
but nothing in this resolution shall be taken to restrict the operation of any existing enactment defining pool betting.
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution should have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913.

4. Vehicles (Excise)

Resolved,
That, from the beginning of the year nineteen hundred and fifty-three, the rate of the annual duty under the Vehicles (Excise) Act, 1949, in respect of a mechanically propelled vehicle chargeable under section six (other than an electrically propelled vehicle) shall be twelve pounds ten shillings, irrespective of the date of the vehicle's first registration.

PURCHASE TAX

5. Purchase Tax (utility goods, etc.)

Resolved,
That—

(a) purchase tax shall be chargeable in respect of goods of any description which are utility articles in the same cases and at the same rates as it is chargeable in respect of

goods of that description which are not utility articles under the enactments and orders now in force, but subject to any provision made in pursuance of the following paragraphs of this resolution or in pursuance of any other resolution of the Committee of Ways and Means, and subject to any Treasury order made under section twenty-one of the Finance Act, 1948, after the passing of the Act giving effect to this resolution;
(b) subject to any such Treasury order, garments trimmed with fursk in (including skin with fur, hair or wool attached), but not otherwise made thereof, shall not be chargeable with purchase tax at the third rate under paragraph (f) of Group 1 in Part 1 of the Eighth Schedule to the Finance Act, 1948, but (except in so far as they are comprised in some other paragraph of that Group) shall, if of a kind suitable for young children's wear, be exempt from purchase tax and, if not of such a kind be comprised in paragraph (a) of that Group (which charges tax at the first rate in respect of garments and footwear not comprised in any other paragraph):
(c) there shall no longer be power to define the classes of goods affected by any such Treasury order by reference to marks the use of which the Board of Trade have power to regulate;
(d) except as respects utility furniture and component parts of utility furniture, effect shall be given to this resolution as from the seventeenth day of March, nineteen hundred and fifty-two.

6. Purchase Tax (deductions from
wholesale value)

Resolved,
That—

(a) where an article falling within any class of goods to which this resolution applies is an article of a description specified in the prescribed list for that class, then if the wholesale value of the article does not exceed the amount specified in the list in relation to that description, any purchase tax which would otherwise be chargeable in respect of the article shall not be chargeable, and if the wholesale value of the article does exceed the amount so specified, any purchase tax chargeable in respect of the article shall be chargeable on the excess only instead of on the wholesale value of the article (but so that an article shall be treated as excluded from any description specified in the list for a class within which the article falls, if the article is comprised in some other description so specified and the amount specified in relation to that other description is the lower);
(b) this resolution shall apply to the three following classes of goods—

Class I. wearing apparel, including handkerchiefs:
Class II, cloth, plastic sheeting which is of a kind suitable for making garments or curtains, tablecloths and similar soft furnishings, domestic textile articles, soft furnishings and bedding, but excluding floor coverings and material for floor coverings:


Class III, furniture of a kind used for domestic purposes, but excluding clocks, musical instruments, heating or lighting appliances and apparatus and appliances and apparatus operated by gas or electricity;

and the prescribed list for any of those classes shall be such list as may be prescribed by or under any Act giving effect to this resolution;
(c) provision shall be made—

(i) for treating as chargeable goods articles in respect of which tax is not chargeable by reason of the new provisions made in pursuance of this resolution;
(ii) for applying section twenty-four of the Finance Act, 1948 (which relates to the effect of changes in the charge to tax in relation to pre-existing contracts), to changes made by or under the new provisions in the goods in respect of which tax is chargeable or in the amount of tax chargeable in respect of any goods;
(iii) for enabling regulations under Part V of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1940, to direct that for the purpose of the new provisions an article shall be treated as an article of a particular material or class of material unless marked to show that it is an article of some other material or class of material;
(d) effect shall be given to this resolution as from the seventeenth day of March, nineteen hundred and fifty-two, except in relation

CLASS I


Description of article
Amount not chargeable



£
s.
d.



A.—Articles of men's or boys' wear of any of the following descriptions:






1. Overcoats, cloaks and raincoats, being garments exceeding 42" in length:






(a) of Class A material, fully-lined or lined at least down to the waist (including the sleeves, if any), or of sheepskin
6
10
0
per article


(b) of Class A material, not so lined
2
5
0
per article


2. Overcoats, cloaks, raincoats, mackintosh coats, oilskin coats, fishermen's oilskin frocks and overall coats, being garments exceeding 42" in length and of Class B material:






(a) fully-lined
4
15
0
per article


(b) of double-texture cloth and not fully-lined
3
10
0
per article


(c) not of double-texture cloth nor fully-lined
2
5
0
per article


3. Coats, cloaks and overall coats, being garments not exceeding 42" in length, jackets (not including blouse-type jackets or pyjama jackets), blazers, overall jackets, waterproof capes and fishermen's oilskin skirts:






(a) of Class A material, full-lined, or of skeepskin
4
0
0
per article


(b) of Class A material, not fully-lined
2
5
0
per article


(c) of Class B material, fully-lined or of double-texture cloth
2
0
0
per article


(d) of Class B material, but not of double-texture cloth nor fully-lined
1
5
0
per article


4. Blouse-type jackets, waistcoats, cardigans, jerseys, sweaters, pullovers, slip-overs and bed-jackets
1
1
0
per article


5. Trousers (not including pyjama trousers), overall trousers, oilskin trousers. plus-fours, breeches, jodhpurs, kilts and bib-and-brace overalls:






(a) of Class A material
2
5
0
per article


(b) of Class B material
1
15
0
per article


6. Shorts and knickers:






(a) of Class A material
1
12
0
per article


(b) of Class B material

10
0
per article


7. Thigh-length leggings:






(a) of double-texture cloth
1
3
0
per pair




(11
6
per article)


(b) not of double-texture cloth

15
0
per pair




(7
6
per article)

to furniture, and (subject to paragraph (b) of this resolution) for the two other classes of goods the lists contained in the subjoined Table shall be the prescribed lists having effect from that date.

TABLE

NOTE—In this Table—

the expression "Class A material" means textile material containing more than 15 per cent. by weight of fibre (whether or not subjected to any process of manufacture or recovery) from the coat or fleece of alpaca, camel, goat, hare, lamb, llama, rabbit, sheep, vicuna or yak, or of horsehair;
the expression "Class B material" means material other than Class A material and other than fur skin;
the expression "Class C material" means cloth of which the textile content comprises not less than 80 per cent. by weight of flax;
the expression "fur skin" includes any skin with fur, hair or wool attached;
any reference to things "of" any material refers, unless the context otherwise requires, to things made wholly or mainly of that material, any lining or interlining being disregarded, except that anything fully-lined with fur skin is to be treated as being of fur skin.

Description of article (men's or boys' wear)
Amount not chargeable



£
s.
d.



8. Shirts (with or without collar attached)

17
6
per article


9. Shirt collars and shirt neckbands

1
9
per article


10. Dressing-gowns and bath-robes:


(a) of Class A material
3
15
0
per article


(b) of Class B material
2
0
0
per article


11. Aprons (with or without bib):


(a) of leather, rubber or asbestos
1
10
0
per article


(b) of material other than leather, rubber and asbestos

12
0
per article


12. Overall boiler suits, overall gowns and overall smocks, being garments exceeding 42" in length
2
5
0
per article


13. Pyjama jackets and pyjama trousers

10
0
per article


14. Nightshirts
1
0
0
per article


15. Undervests, singlets, pants, trunks and drawers:


(a) of Class A material

14
0
per article


(b) of Class B material

4
0
per article


16. Combinations:


(a) of Class A material
1
5
0
per article


(b) of Class B material

7
0
per article


17. Bathing costumes, bathing trunks and swimming drawers:


(a) of Class A material

10
0
per article


(b) of Class B material

2
0
per article


18. Stockings and socks:


(a) of Class A material

5
6
per pair




(2
9
per article)


(b) of Class B material

2
6
per pair




(1
3
per article)


19. Boots and bootees:


(a) articles which are either unlined or lined only with cotton fabric or leather, and are not made wholly or partly of fur or imitation fur
3
0
0
per pair



(1
10
0
per article)


(b) articles of any other description
2
0
0
per pair



(1
0
0
per article)


20. Shoes (including sandals, but not including slippers):


(a) with uppers of leather
2
0
0
per pair



(1
0
0
per article)


(b) of rubber or with moulded rubber soles and uppers of fabric

15
0
per pair




(7
6
per article)


(c) of any other description
1
5
0
per pair




(12
6
per article)


21. Slippers

15
0
per pair




(7
6
per article)


22. Articles of headgear, of woven cloth, being either articles suitable only for infants' wear or caps, berets, sou'westers or industrial hats, and articles of headgear or knitted cloth or wholly or mainly knitted

8
0
per article


23. Gloves:


(a) articles which apart from any stitchings, fastenings or trimmings are wholly knitted or made wholly of woven or knitted cloth

3
0
per pair




(1
6
per article)


(b) articles of any other description

12
0
per pair




(6
0
per article)


24. Scarves, knitted or woven:


(a) of Class A material

10
0
per article


(b) of Class B material

3
0
per article


25. Braces

4
0
per article

Description of article (women's or girls' wear)
Amount not chargeable



£
s.
d.



3. Jackets (not including blouse-type jackets or pyjama jackets), blazers, coats, cloaks, capes (not including cycling capes) and overalls with sleeves, being garments exceeding 20" in length but not exceeding 42" in length; cycling capes exceeding 20" in length, waistcoats with sleeves, blouses, shirt-blouses, shirts (with or without collar attached), cardigans of woven or knitted cloth and jumpers of woven or knitted cloth:






(a) of Class A material, fully-lined, or of fur skin
4
0
0
per article


(b) of Class A material, not fully-lined
2
0
0
per article


(c) of Class B material, fully-lined or of double-texture cloth
1
15
0
per article


(d) of Class B material, but not of double-texture cloth nor fully-lined

16
0
per article


4. Boleros, jackets and capes, being garments not exceeding 20" in length, and fur stoles containing not less than 2 sq. ft. of fur skin measured on the leather
1
0
0
per article


5. Blouse-type jackets, sleeveless waistcoats, knitted jumpers, knitted cardigans, jerseys, sweaters and bed-jackets
1
0
0
per article


6. Skirts, kilts, divided skirts, shorts, slacks, breeches, jodhpurs and bib-and-brace-overalls:






(a) of Class A material
2
0
0
per article


(b) of Class B material
1
5
0
per article


7. Dresses, pianafore-dresses, gym tunics, housecoats, dressing-gowns and bath-robes:






(a) of Class A material
3
15
0
per article


(b) of Class B material
2
0
0
per article


8. Overalls exceeding 42" in length, boiler suits and overall gowns
2
0
0
per article


9. Aprons (with ot without bib) and pinarettes

5
0
per article


10. Shirt collars and shirt neckbands

1
9
per article


11. Pyjama jackets and pyjama trousers

10
0
per article


12. Nightdresses

15
0
per article


13. Slips, petticoats and cami-knickers

8
6
per article


14. Undervests, spencers, camisoles and bodices:






(a) of Class A material

9
0
per article


(b) of Class B material

3
0
per article


15. Knickers, pantees and briefs:






(a) of Class A material

6
0
per article


(b) of Class B material

4
0
per article


16. Combinations:






(a) of Class A material
1
0
0
per article


(b) of Class B material

7
0
per article


17. Corsets (not including roll-on elastic belts) and corselettes
1
0
0
per article


18. Brassieres, suspender belts and roll-on elastic belts

5
6
per article


19. Bathing costumes (including two-piece and three-piece bathing costumes)

11
6
per costume


20. Stockings and three-quarter hose:






(a) of Class A material

5
6
per pair




(2
9
per article)


(b) of Class B material

3
6
per pair




(1
9
per article)


21. Ankle socks:






(a) of Class A material

2
0
per pair




(1
0
per article)


(b) of Class B material

1
3
per pair





(7½
per article)


22. Boots and bootees:






(a) articles which are either unlined or lined only with cotton fabric or leather, and are not made wholly or partly of fur or imitation fur
3
0
0
per pair



(1
10
0
per article)


(b) articles of any other description
1
17
0
per pair




(18
6
per article)


23. Shoes (including sandals and slippers):






(a) with uppers of leather
1
17
0
per pair




(18
6
per article)


(b) of rubber or with moulded rubber soles and uppers of fabric

15
0
per pair




(7
6
per article)


(c) of any other description
1
8
0
per pair




(14
0
per article)


24. Articles of headgear, of woven cloth, being either articles suitable only for infants' wear or articles forming part of a matching set with a coat not exceeding 42" in length or caps, berets, hoods, sou'westers or industrial hats, and articles of headgear of knitted cloth or wholly or mainly knitted

8
0
per article

Description of article (women's or girls' wear)
Amount not chargeable


25. Gloves:
£
s.
d.



(a) articles which apart from any stitchings, fastenings or trimmings are wholly knitted or made wholly of woven or knitted cloth

3
0
 per pair




(1
6
per article)


(b) articles of any other description

12
0
 per pair




(6
0
per article)


26. Scarves and shawls, being knitted or woven articles:






(a) of Class A material

10
0
per article


(b) of Class B material

3
0
per article


Description of article






C.—Handkerchiefs of the following descriptions:






1. Handkerchiefs of Class C material:






(a) exceeding 256 square inches in area

1
6
per article


(b) not exceeding 256 square inches in area


9
per article


2. Handkerchiefs of material other than Class C material:






(a) exceeding 256 square inches in area

1
0
per article


(b) not exceeding 256 square inches in area


6
per article


CLASS II






1. Cloth exceeding 3" in width, in the piece or in cut lengths, including cloth which has been dyed, printed, coated or otherwise treated:






(a) Class A material

14
6
per sq. yd.


(b) Class B material

4
0
per sq. yd.


2. Plastic sheeting, in the piece or in cut lengths

4
0
per sq. yd.


3. Blankets, travelling rugs, pram rugs, bedspreads, counterpanes (not including filled quilts), curtains and curtain panels:






(a) of Class A material

14
6
per sq. yd.


(b) of Class B material

4
0
per sq. yd.


4. Bed sheets, table cloths and table covers:






(a) of Class A material

14
6
per sq. yd.


(b) of Class C material

6
0
per sq. yd.


(c) of Class B material, other than Class C material.

4
0
per sq. yd.


5. Pillows

10
0
per article


6. Bolsters:






(a) not less than 45" in length
1
0
0
per article


(b) less than 45" in length

15
0
per article


7. Overlay mattresses, soft filled:






(a) not less than 45" in width
7
10
0
per article


(b) less than 45" in width
5
0
0
per article


8. Upholstered overlay mattresses with spring or cellular rubber interior (not including boxspring mattresses or spring-bases):






(a) not less than 45" in width
10
10
0
per article


(b) less than 45" in width
7
10
0
per article


9. Filled quilts:






(a) not less than 53" in width
2
10
0
per article


(b) less than 53" in width
2
0
0
per article


10. Pillow cases:






(a) of Class C material

6
0
per article


(b) of other material

4
0
per article


11. Bolster cases of Class C material:






(a) not less than 53" in length

16
6
per article


(b) less than 53" in length

10
6
per article


12. Bolster cases of material other than Class C material:






(a) not less than 53" in length

11
0
per article


(b) less than 53" in length

7
0
per article


13. Pillow ticks

3
6
per article


14. Mattress ticks:






(a) not less than 45" in width
1
10
0
per article


(b) less than 45" in width
1
0
0
per article


15. Table napkins, tray cloths and table mats, being articles not exceeding ½ square yard in area:






(a) of Class C material

3
0
per article


(b) of other material

2
0
per article


16. Towels and tea towels, being articles of Class C material, and terry towels of other material:






(a) exceeding 1 square yard in area

7
6
per article


(b) exceeding ½ square yard but not exceeding 1 square yard in area

5
3
per article


(c) not exceeding ½ square yard in area

3
0
per article


17. Towels (not including terry towels) and tea towels, being articles of material other than Class C material:






(a) exceeding 1 square yard in area

5
0
per article


(b) exceeding ½ square yard but not exceeding 1 square yard in area

3
6
per article


(c) not exceeding ½ square yard in area

2
0
per article

INCOME TAX

7. Charge of Income Tax for 1952–53

Resolved,
That income tax for the year 1952–53 shall be charged at the standard rate of nine shillings and sixpence in the pound and in the case of an individual whose total income exceeds two thousand pounds, at such higher rates in respect of the excess over two thousand pounds as Parliament may hereafter determine.
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution should have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act. 1913.

8. income Tax (personal reliefs, etc.)

Resolved,
That the Income Tax Act, 1952, shall be amended as follows:—

(a) in section two hundred and twenty (reduced rate relief)—

(i) references to £50 and £200 (the amounts to which the three shilling and five and sixpenny rates ordinarily apply) shall be replaced by references to £100 and £150, and accordingly the references to £100 and £400 (the special amounts for cases where the wife has earned income) shall be replaced by references to £200 and £300;
(ii) there shall be added a new provision that where the amount of tax remaining chargeable as mentioned in subsection (1) exceeds tax at the standard rate on £250, there shall be a further deduction equal to four-nineteenths of the excess or to four-nineteenths of the tax at the standard rate on £150, whichever is the less (giving a reduced rate on that amount of 7s. 6d.), together with an extension for cases to which subsection (2) (wife's earned income) applies corresponding to subsection (4) with the substitution for the present references to £50, £200, £250 and £400 of references to £250, to £150, to £400, and to £300;
and subsection (3) of section three hundred and fifty-four (which apportions the personal reliefs in part to the wife's earned income) shall apply to so much of the new provision as corresponds to the said subsection (4) as it applies to the said subsection (4);
(b) in section two hundred and ten (personal reliefs) the references to £110 and £190 (which fix the amounts of the personal relief and also the limit on the additional relief on wife's earned income) shall be replaced by references to £120 and £210;
(c) in sections two hundred and twelve and two hundred and thirteen (children relief) the references to £70 (which fix the amount of the

relief for each child and the limit on the child's own income) shall be replaced by references to £85;
(d) in section two hundred and eleven (earned income and old age reliefs) the fraction one-fifth (which fixes the rate of those reliefs), and in section two hundred and ten the fraction four-fifths (which fixes the rate of the additional relief on wife's earned income), shall be replaced by the fractions two-ninths and sevennjnths, and in section two hundred and eleven the reference to £400 (which fixes the limit on the earned income relief) shall be replaced by a reference to £450;
(e) there shall be added a new provision, in place of section two hundred and nine (incomes below £160), that a claimant not entitled to relief under subsection (2) of section two hundred and eleven) old age relief)—

(i) it he proves that his total income does not exceed £250, shall be entitled to a deduction from the amount of income tax with which he is chargeable equal to tax at the standard rate on two-ninths of the amount of that income;
(ii) if he proves that his total income does not exceed £350, shall be entitled to have the amount of income tax payable in respect of his total income reduced, where necessary, so as not to exceed a sum equal to the aggregate of the two following amounts, that is to say, the amount of the tax which would have been payable if his total income had amounted to, but had not exceeded, £250, and two-fifths of the amount by which his total income exceeds £250;
but so that the Income Tax Act, 1952, and in particular Part VIII shall apply to relief under the new provision in the same way as to relief under subsection (2) of section two hundred and eleven, except that the references to that subsection in subsection (1) of section two hundred and twenty and subsection (4) of section two hundred and twenty-five shall not apply to the provision in sub-paragraph (ii) of this paragraph;

Provided that the changes effected by this resolution shall not affect the amounts of tax deductible or repayable under section one hundred and fifty-seven of the Income Tax Act, 1952, before the eighth day of June, nineteen hundred and fifty-two, but nothing in this proviso shall prevent the resulting under-deductions, over-deductions, under-repayments and over-repayments of tax from being adjusted subsequently by means of increased or diminished deductions and repayments under the said section one hundred and fifty-seven, or, if need be, by an assessment.
And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution should have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913.

9. Income Tax (sources of income ceasing to yield income)

Resolved,
That it is expedient to authorise such additional charges to income tax under Case III, IV or V of Schedule D (including charges for years before 1952–53) as may result from any new provision about the method of charging tax in cases where a person ceases to possess a source of profits or income from which no profits or income arose during the preceding year of assessment, or possesses a source of profits or income for six consecutive years of assessment without any profits or income arising from it, and in related cases.

10. Income Tax (tied premises)

Resolved,
That, where a lessor of any premises in the course of a trade carried on by him is concerned, whether as principal or agent, in the supply of goods sold or used on the premises, and by reason thereof deals with the premises or his interest therein as property employed for the purposes of that trade, then in computing for the purposes of income tax the profits or gains or losses of that trade—

(a) no deduction shall be allowed in respect of the premises by reference to his being entitled to a rent for the premises less than the rent which might have been obtained (or less than the annual value of, or the rent payable by him for, the premises) or in respect of the rent or annual value of the premises, except such deductions (if any) as may be allowed under any Act of the present session relating to finance; and
(b) there shall be taken into account as a trading receipt the rent payable for the premises to him or such part of that rent as may be directed by any such Act;
and for this purpose a person having an interest in the reversion on the term created by a letting may be treated as a lessor and rent payable to or paid by the actual lessor may be treated as payable to or paid by him.

11. Income Tax (allowances and charges in respect of machinery, plant and patent rights)

Resolved,
That it is expedient to authorise such increases in the income tax payable by any person as may result from amendments of the law relating to allowances, deductions or charges under Part X of the Income Tax Act, 1952, being amendments applicable to machinery or plant or patent rights.

12. Income Tax (underwriters' reserves)

Resolved,
That it is expedient to authorise such increases in the income tax payable by any person as may result from raising the limit on the amounts which Lloyd's and other underwriters may pay into special reserve funds.

13. Income Tax (reserves of marketing boards)

Resolved,
That it is expedient to make provision as to the consequences for income tax purposes in the year 1950–51 and later years of transfers into and out of, and distributions of sums withdrawn from, special reserve funds established by marketing boards in connection with arrangements for maintaining guaranteed prices to producers of any commodity.

14. Income Tax (radio relay services)

Resolved,
That, in the case of radio relay services and in such other cases, if any, as may be specified in any Act giving effect to this resolution, provision (retrospective so as to cover tax for the year 1950–51 and all subsequent years of assessment) shall be made that, for income tax purposes, rents and other payments for easements and other rights connected with electric, telegraphic or telephonic wires or cables shall be deductible in computing profits and losses and shall be deemed not to be payable out of profits or gains brought into charge to tax, without, however, the sum on which tax has been paid in respect thereof being treated as a loss so as to give ground for relief in a subsequent year of assessment.

15. Income Tax (surtax assessments)

Resolved,
That no provision in regulations of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue for surtax to be assessed and charged by the Special Commissioners at an office or a particular office of theirs shall be taken to affect or to have affected the validity of any assessment to surtax, wherever made by them and whether made before or after the passing of this resolution.

16. Income Tax (profits tax not to be a deduction, etc.)

Resolved,
That, as respects the year 1951–52 and subsequent years of assessment,—

(a) profits tax for any chargeable accounting period ending after the end of the year nineteen hundred and fifty-one shall not be a deduction in computing profits or gains or losses for income tax purposes or be reckoned as expenses of management for the purpose of any income tax relief for expenses of management;
(b) foreign tax allowed as a credit against the profits tax for any such period shall not be treated for income tax purposes as reducing the amount of any income.

17. Income Tax (charges consequential on introduction of excess profits levy)

Resolved,
That it is expedient to authorise such increases in the income tax payable by any person for the year 1951–52 or any subsequent


year of assessment as may result from extending any enactment relating to relief for double taxation, with or without modifications, to any excess profits levy provided for by any Act of the present session.

18. PROFITS TAX

Resolved,
That it is expedient to authorise such increases in the profits tax payable by any person for any past, current or future chargeable accounting periods as may result from amending the law relating to the computation of profits or gains or losses for income tax or profits tax purposes or the law relating to allowances, deductions or charges for income tax purposes which affect the profits tax, from extending any enactment affecting the profits tax, with or without modifications, to any excess profits levy provided for by any Act of the present session, from dividing chargeable accounting periods and from raising the limit on the amounts which Lloyd's and other underwriters may pay into special reserve funds.

19. EXCESS PROFITS LEVY

Resolved,
That where the profits of bodies corporate and others arising after the end of the year nineteen hundred and fifty-one exceed a certain standard, a tax, which shall be known as the excess profits levy and shall not be deductible in computing profits or gains or losses for income tax and profits tax purposes, shall be charged equal to thirty per cent. of the excess, and any Act of the present session giving effect to this resolution may, amongst other things, extend or apply to the levy, with or without modifications, any enactment relating to any other tax, and contain special provisions applicable to particular classes of cases.

ESTATE DUTY

20. Estate Duty (exemptions for members of armed forces, etc.)

Resolved,
That, with a view to making better provision for exemption or relief from estate duty in the case of seamen, marines, soldiers and airmen dying in the service of Her Majesty on or after the twelfth day of March, nineteen hundred and fifty-two, and in other cases of persons dying on or after that date from injury received or disease contracted while they were subject to the Naval Discipline Act, military law or the Air Force Act, it is expedient to repeal the enactments relating to exemption or relief from estate duty in such cases.

21. Estate Duty (amendment of Finance Act, 1940)

Resolved,
That Part IV (as amended) of the Finance Act, 1940 (which deals mainly with the charge of estate duty on the assets of certain companies where property has been transferred thereto by the deceased), shall have effect as

if any reference therein to a transfer of property (except in the definition of "payment" in section fifty-nine) included a reference to a payment of money, and as if the expressions "disposition" and "value" respectively, in relation to money, included payment and amount.

GENERAL

22. Amendment of the law

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That it is expedient to amend the law with respect to the National Debt and the public revenue, and to make further provision in connection with finance, so, however, that this resolution shall not extend to giving any relief from purchase tax otherwise than by making the same provision for chargeable goods of whatever description or by reducing the first, second or third rate of the tax generally for all goods to which that rate applies.

5.27 p.m.

Mr. C. R. Attlee: I should like at the outset to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer on having got through the ordeal of presenting a Budget. That in itself is an achievement. He has been lucid, but I think he will agree that it is not a very easy Budget to sum up. It really requires a great deal more mental arithmetic than I am capable of working out as to what is given and what is taken away. We shall need a little time to work it out to see exactly what various individuals and groups of people stand to gain or lose and how these various burdens are distributed.
We note that the Lord President of the Council has been completely thrown over. His declaration at the time of the Election is now null and void and one presumes that he has tendered his resignation. It is also clear that whatever advantages may have been given to sections of the population, the halving almost of the food subsidies itself means a steep rise in the cost of living. I understand that the reduction of the cost of living was the chief plank in the propaganda of the party opposite at Election time.
There are a number of detailed matters which I confess I could not follow. The Chancellor of the Exchequer ran over pretty quickly a whole number of minor points, and I could not tell whether anyone would be for or against them. I regret that he has again raised the Bank rate. That increases our burden on the public debt. I gathered when he did it


before that it was to have some psychological effect on the people at home. I gather from his speech that when he does it now it is to give a guarantee of good faith to our foreign friends. I think he will pay a big price for that.
Broadly speaking, this is a Budget in which there are good things, bad things and indifferent things; and until I have had a little more time to look at it, I am not making a final verdict about its total effect on the people with whom we are most concerned: the mass of the people of this country.
Chairman to report Progress and ask leave to sit again.—[Mr. Butcher.]

Resolutions to be reported Tomorrow; Committee also report Progress; to sit again Tomorrow.

EDUCATION, WALES

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Butcher.]

5.31 p.m.

Mr. George Thomas: I welcome the opportunity of raising in the House this afternoon the question of education in the Principality of Wales, and it is a good thing that the House has given us such a good interval for our debate.
I want to raise the question of the effect of the Government's education policy on the schools throughout Wales, where one of the outstanding characteristics of the people is a passionate desire to give their children a sound education. There is no country in the world where the value of a good education is more appreciated than in Wales, and in no part of the United Kingdom has the Conservative Party's mean approach to the service of education caused more anxiety and alarm.
I want, first, to refer to the building programme throughout the Principality. I understand that no less than five Welsh local authorities have been refused a single building project during the coming year; that in Breconshire, Montgomeryshire, Merthyr, Anglesey and Pembroke-shire not a single building project is included in the Estimates which the Minister is prepared to approve.
In addition, there are five Welsh local authorities for each of whom only one building project has been approved: Newport, Denbigh, Caernarvonshire, Merioneth and Swansea, Swansea, that received such a severe buffeting in the late war and which has such a great need. is, I understand, allowed only one building project by the Ministry during the coming year.
In Wales, we have our share of schools that are a disgrace to a civilised community. In the days just prior to the late war, the Leader of the Liberal Party was responsible for the production of a report on the causes of tuberculosis in the Principality. One of the major causes that he submitted in his report to the House was the condition of the rural schools of Wales, where the water runs down the walls and round the floor, and where on a wet day water is everywhere except in the school tap—and usually there is none there.
I ask the Minister, who I am very glad to see present, whether she is satisfied that she is not sentencing another generation of Welsh children to the awful conditions that have already been criticised by hon. Members on both sides of the House. It may well be that an hon. Member opposite will say, "Why was it not put right? You have been in power for six years; therefore all these village schools should have been put right and we ought to have brand new schools everywhere."
The House will be aware that we have had more school building in Wales in the last six years than in the previous 25 years. No one, therefore, can point a finger across to this side of the House and say that we did not have a square deal. We should have liked to have had more, but we had more than we had ever had from any Government that has been in power during my lifetime. I warn the Minister that she will be committing a crime against the next generation of Welsh children if she now puts the brake on any new school buildings in the counties which I have quoted.
I want to refer to the effect of Circular 242, which the Minister, I know, is not very often allowed to forget. When we look through the economies which have been decided upon in the Principality of Wales as the result of the initiative of the Minister herself, we cannot but be


alarmed at the prospects for our children. The City of Cardiff, which the Joint Under-Secretary of State responsible for Welsh Affairs has the honour to represent with myself and my colleague, the hon. Member for Cardiff, South-East (Mr. Callaghan), has decided upon a cut of £63,000, a 3½ per cent. cut in its original estimate.
It so happens that the party in power and the local authority in the City of Cardiff are not unsympathetic, to say the least, to the right hon. Lady. Indeed, at times of general elections all those who are in power in Cardiff support the opposite side of the House. I submit that these are not people who would have been anxious to go too far in matters educational.
We have a most progressive chairman of the education authority in the Principality of Cardiff, a man of the party opposite and not of my party, but one whom we all acknowledge to have a very deep interest in matters educational in the Principality. People who are interested in education, regardless of their party, are aghast at the way in which the Ministry are putting the brake upon authorities who want to do the right thing by their children. As the Minister will know, we already have in Cardiff a large amount of leeway to make up, but once again we shall have to mark time and another generation will miss its chance. We can never make up to those children who miss their chance today what they will lose.
Let us look at North Wales, Flintshire. I see that there they have decided that they will have to spend less on furniture. Well and good. But they are cutting down the amount they intend to spend on textbooks for our children. They are to spend less on stationery and less on nursery and primary schools. They have also decided upon an increase in the size of classes.
Most hon. Members are aware that I am a schoolmaster by profession. I say to the House that when a schoolmaster asks for smaller classes it is not because it is easier for the schoolmaster. Indeed, it is a great deal harder for the schoolmaster with a small class than with a large class, because so much more personal attention can be given to the children in a small class than in a large

one, where the schoolmaster congratulates himself if he is able to keep order. I believe that in Flintshire grave damage will be done to the education service by the cuts that have been decided upon.
When I look at the County of Glamorganshire, I find that there is an estimated cut of £183,705, which represents a cut of 3.09 per cent. My hon. Friend the Member for Brecon and Radnor (Mr. Watkins) will probably want to catch the eye of Mr. Speaker in the course of the debate, so I will leave the subject of Breckonshire to him to deal with.
In Pembrokeshire they have decided to save money by the appointment of younger teachers. I am all for younger teachers having appointments, but I do hope they will not say in Pembrokeshire that experience does not count. They have already asked the advice of the Minister, or sought her observations, about refusing admission to schools of children who have not reached the age of five years on 1st April next. Apparently they want to dispense with all nursery classes and nursery schools. I hope that when the Minister replies she will give me the assurance, as she did to one of my hon. Friends about another authority, that she will not countenance this attack upon the nursery schools in the Pembrokeshire area.
I notice that the Pembrokeshire authority proposes to reduce by £3,000 their estimate for the upkeep of school buildings. I submit to the Minister that this is a short-sighted policy. If we do not spend on the repair of our school buildings this year, we shall only have a bigger bill than ever next year. I hope that the Minister will intimate to that authority that she has no desire for that to be done. There are the usual economies in the youth service, in technical institutes and evening classes. It is a sorry story with which I hope the Minister will deal when she replies tonight.
Amongst the authorities in Wales of which I know who are proposing to try to save some money by having fewer teachers, Flintshire and Pembrokeshire stand out. Amongst those who propose to save money on further education, scholarships and aid to students, Pembrokeshire stands out. On reduced estimates for repairs and decorations Flint-shire and Pembrokeshire again stand out,


as does Flintshire on the question of school equipment.
I hope that the Minister will be able to give us tonight an idea of the general effect of her circular on the service of education, on the buildings that are available and also its effect upon scholarships and aids to students. I hope also that she will give us an assurance tonight that she will not countenance an attempt by the meaner authorities of the Principality to cut down their aid to students going to college.
Now I want to refer to a question of which I have already given notice to the Minister. It concerns handicapped children and the provision of a school for them in the Principality. Last Thursday I asked the Minister if she would make a statement concerning the progress being made in the provision of a school for physically handicapped children in Wales. I ask the House to note with care her reply. The right hon. Lady said:
I hope that the Glamorgan local education authority will proceed with the purchase of a suitable site and with the planning of the school at an early date."—[OFFIAL REPORT, 6th March, 1952; Vol. 497, c. 634.]
I suggest that answer was intended to convey to the House that this project had the full blessing of the Minister to go ahead as quickly as the local authority could do so. That is the only possible meaning we can put upon the reply which the Minister gave: that she said to the Glamorgan County Council that the sooner they could do it, the better. That was the impression I received, and the Minister will remember that I so fell for the reply that I thanked her for it.
Now I find that the Director of Education for the County of Glamorgan has written to Mr. Northam, the Secretary of the Cardiff and District Spastics Association, a letter which makes nonsense of the misleading reply which the Minister gave to the House last Thursday. I propose to read the letter:
Dear Mr. Northam, I thank you for your letter of 27th February. As you are probably aware, the Glamorgan Authority had proposed to proceed with the erection of a hospital school for physically handicapped children, including spastics, in the year 1952–53. This school, of course, was to provide for the needs of neighbouring Authorities (including Cardiff as well). The Ministry of Education declared some time ago their readiness to include this school in the authorised building programme

for 1952–53, but a communication has recently been received that consideration will be given to the inclusion of this school in the provisional building programme for 1953–54.
The Director goes on to say:
Although I regret that I have no encouraging news to give you, I can assure you that the recent decision "—
that is, the Minister's decision—
caused great disappointment to the members of the Authority who are only too well aware of the very great need to improve the educational provision for handicapped children. Yours sincerely, E. Stephens, Director of Education.
I suggest that inadvertently the Minister misled the House last Thursday afternoon with the reply she gave to me. She certainly avoided revealing the full truth of the answer that my Question sought to bring out. Surely the Minister will be ready to apologise tonight for misleading at least one hon. Member and, I believe, all hon. Members on this side of the House on that important question?
There is a special need for a school for handicapped children in the Principality of Wales, where it is estimated that we have nearly 400 spastic children. These are children who have no muscular control but whose minds can be as sharp as razors. Indeed, I have met some of these spastic individuals with first-class honours degrees. Given the opportunity, they can obtain out of life not quite as much perhaps as the normally healthy able individual, but much more than otherwise they would have.
There is not a school from the north to the south or from the east to the west of Wales catering for spastic children, and now that project again has to be postponed apparently. I ask the Minister to recognise that the policy indicated in that letter from the Director of Education—and I have no reason to doubt that he is conveying the truth to my constituents—would be a cruel, unnecessary and shortsighted one.
We are proud of the fact that we are a democracy, and we are living at a time when the world is divided by the ideological struggle of this century. Surely in a world like this the school takes on a new importance. In my opinion, in a democracy the schoolmaster is quite as important, and perhaps more important, than the sergeant major, and the class room is of more importance than the barrack square. I hope we are not going


to cut down the provisions or refuse facilities for provisions of schools for spastic children in Wales because our money is to go for armaments.
Decent people in all parties in Wales—we are not claiming a monopoly of decency—will resent the holding up of this school. I ask the Minister to give the House an assurance that the Glamorgan authority shall have the "all clear" to get on with this school for spastic children.
I understand there have been approaches to the Ministry in connection with the school for subnormal children for the counties of Carmarthenshire, Pembrokeshire and Cardiganshire. I am not in a position to say what state of negotiation that matter has reached, but I earnestly hope that here again the Minister will give the "go ahead" to those authorities. We are very proud that during the previous Administration we set up the Joint Education Committee for Wales, and local authorities in Wales are co-operating in a magnificent manner to make provisions that as individuals they cannot make for their children. I ask the Minister to make sure that where joint endeavours of this sort are entered upon she will not be niggardly in her approach.
I wish to refer to the question of the size of classes in the Principality. We have a good record in this regard, and I think that generally the size of classes in the Principality is smaller than it was in England in the years between the wars. We have always regarded education as a top priority. Working people there will sacrifice almost everything to give their youngsters a chance of a good education. Are we once again to see the size of classes go up throughout the Principality in order that a few pounds shall be saved here or there?
I suggest this is a short-sighted policy which we shall have to put right when the opportunity arises. But it would be much better if the Minister asserted her authority and proved she is the Minister and that the voice we have heard this afternoon is not the voice of the Minister and that she realises all that opportunity denied to youngsters can create in frustration and resentment and will lend her assistance to those who above all are concerned with a square deal

for our kiddies who, after all, are not responsible for the mess in which the world finds itself at present.
The people of Wales are a peaceful people, but now they are on the alert and on guard. They are watching the Minister very carefully and I advise her—

Mr. Kenneth Thompson: We have only to look at the right hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. A. Bevan) to see that.

Mr. Thomas: We are always a peaceful people, but ready to fight for a just cause, and then we are as warlike as the rest. I warn the Minister and her Parliamentary Secretary and hon. Members behind her who represent scattered Tory seats in Wales that they will not be in the next Parliament if she does not show that justice and consideration which is our due.

5.56 p.m.

Mr. Percy Morris: I gladly avail myself of this unexpected opportunity of reinforcing the eloquent plea made by my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, West (Mr. G. Thomas). He has been good enough not to confine his remarks to the constituency he represents but has extended them to the title he has given the Adjournment debate namely, Welsh education.
I do not wish to engage in repetition, but I wish to assure the Minister that what my hon. Friend has said about spastic schools is of great urgency for the whole of South and West Wales, and that my hon. Friend has earned the gratitude of the Welsh authorities by giving such emphasis to the matter this afternoon. For many years the principal export from Wales seemed to be teachers, preachers and lawyers, but a new situation has developed there in recent years.
Under the encouragement and guidance of the last Government we had embarked, in the County Borough of Swansea, on a very progressive programme of educational facilities for our children. We were hoping—in fact plans had been approved and a site selected—to provide a college of technology that would cater not only for the needs of the children of Swansea but for the whole of South and West Wales. The need for such a college is obvious to anybody who has taken an


interest in the industrial development of Wales. Unhappily, on account of Circular 242 and the general atmosphere that now prevails, it seems that that college will not be erected for many years. I beg the Minister to give the matter her attention.
I understand that colleagues of mine from Swansea are waiting on the Department tomorrow to indicate difficulties with which they are confronted in endeavouring to implement a programme which was approved under the last Government. They have made very serious efforts to economise wherever possible but they have not made the mistake of urging an increase in the numbers in classes and neither are they willing to hinder the development of nursery schools. They have assumed that the Minister really means what she says in her circular, that they are not to interfere with the fabric of education. But if they are not to interfere with it they will require some assistance from the right hon. Lady.
Not only are we supporting the claim for this school for spastic children, but we are asking for this college of technology. I would make particular reference to my own constituency, which is a badly blitzed area and especially in need of new schools being built and other schools being re-constructed and modernised. I know of one school for girls which was put up as a temporary school and has already been in existence for 30 years. Instead of having increased educational facilities and of being allowed to widen our scope in that growing industrial area, we are being told that we cannot afford it.
I should have liked to have given the right hon. Lady more notice of this matter. I appreciate that she may not be able to answer on the spur of the moment about the college I have mentioned. But I ask the House to believe that tonight the hon. Member for Cardiff, West, has been the very voice of Wales in these matters. If the right hon. Lady is able to give the assurance he has asked for, and if the blitzed areas will have their difficulties recognised and will be given proper encouragement to provide these facilities, not merely for the training of teachers and preachers, but to provide the technicians so badly required in

the industries of Wales, we shall feel that this Adjournment debate has been really worth while.

6.1 p.m.

Mr. Roderic Bowen: I should like to associate myself in general with the observations already made. I wish to draw the attention of the Minister to two matters in relation to education in which my constituency and neighbouring constituencies are particularly interested at the moment.
The counties of Carmarthen, Pembroke and Cardigan have prepared a scheme for a residential special school for about 60 educationally sub-normal children. This is a scheme which is long overdue, because at the moment no facilities exist in any of these three counties for the educating and training of sub-normal children, and at last a scheme has been prepared. They have a building in view, and, subject to Ministerial sanction, there is no reason why this much needed facility should not be provided.
I need hardly emphasise the need for the school, because there is a very real problem here. Some 60 sub-normal children are now attending an ordinary school in the ordinary way, placing a very great burden upon their parents at home and upon the staff of the schools, which is necessarily unfair to children attending the school in the ordinary way.
Quite apart from that, the fact that these facilities do not exist means that these sub-normal children have very little prospect of that additional training and development which would mean so much to them in enabling them to face life in the ordinary way after suitable training. I therefore urge the Minister to look most sympathetically upon this scheme, because these authorities ought to have moved in this matter long ago.
It is a long-standing problem, but at last they have faced up to the difficulties; these three counties have got together, and that is something which is not easy. The three local education authorities have combined and cooperated to provide a joint school for the three counties, and I hope the Minister will do nothing which will in any way retard the provision of this residential school for sub-normal children in this area.
Another matter to which I wish to direct the Minister's attention is the provision of Welsh books. This has been receiving and is receiving attention from numerous bodies in Wales today, and the joint working party on the publication of Welsh books met recently. I do not want to go into the details of various proposals put forward, but I urge the Minister to adopt a most sympathetic attitude towards this problem.
We have, for example, in Cardiganshire a very excellent county library service—buildings and mobile libraries. There is, contrary to the position in many other parts of Wales, a real demand for Welsh books, and one of the main difficulties is the lack of availability of new Welsh books to meet that demand.
The same problem arises in our schools. The staffs of schools are anxious to give varied and interesting instruction through the medium of Welsh, and if that is to be done satisfactorily there must be an adequate supply of Welsh books. This is a problem which affects, in the main the rural part of Wales, and I urge the Minister to treat most sympathetically the approaches which will be made to her to attempt to solve this problem.

6.7 p.m.

Mr. Goronwy Roberts: I wish briefly to draw attention to two points affecting the Welsh educational scheme more than any other at the present time. The first is the question of assistance grants to students provided by local education authorities, which are almost the only agency for this kind of grant, or have been for two or three years.
It would be invidious of me to single out any particular local education authority for deprecation in this respect, and I will not quote examples county by county. But I feel sure that I carry with me Members representing Welsh constituencies on both sides of the House when I say that the variation in the extent and scope of the county assistance grants to Welsh students in universities is most marked.
As a former lecturer of the university most concerned in the Principality, I am bound to say that the arbitrary difference between the grants made available by county A and the grants made available to another student by county B is having a very bad psychological effect upon the students. I wonder whether it would be

possible for the Department to bring some kind of benevolent pressure to bear upon the various local education authorities with a view to their more or less "uniformising" their grant policies.
I could give individual examples of say, two students in the same university college studying side by side, reading the same subject, following the same degree scheme, having more or less the same qualifications and scholastic attainments, both entering the university at the same time, but coming from two different local education authority areas and differing in the most marked fashion in the assistance they obtain from their local education authorities.

Mr. Bowen: Does the hon. Gentleman also recognise that that happens in many instances with children attending the same school and living in the same village?

Mr. Roberts: And living in the same street. I recall to mind an example of two university students both in their second year, reading for the same degree, both the children of slate quarriers, and in very much the same economic circumstances, yet because of a certain lack of cohesion in the matter of grants they were receiving different assistance. It varies from county to county, and it varies most arbitrarily also within a single county. I therefore hope that some kind of pressure may be brought to bear on. or leadership given in, that rather difficult and upsetting state of affairs.
The hon. Member for Cardigan (Mr. Bowen) referred to the interest which is now felt in Wales about the future of the publishing of Welsh books. I happen to have the honour of serving on a small Home Office committee which is investigating among other things the provision of Welsh books, particularly in schools. I will not anticipate the findings of that committee because it has not yet decided on any recommendations, but I will say that we are all familiar with the extraordinary fact that out of the £35 per pupil which is spent annually in primary and secondary schools in England and Wales, as little as 6s. 5d. is spent on the provision of school books. Now that is an extraordinary position for any educational system to be in.
In Wales the position is complicated and worsened by the fact that most of our


education authorities are under a statutory obligation to provide reading material in two languages. The problem for the English authorities is a very different one. They find that the cost of teachers' salaries, maintenance, and so on, restricts their expenditure on actual reading books to some 6s. 5d. a year, and that is bad enough in a monolingual area such as we have in England. But in Wales, where the vast majority of local education authorities have an obligation to pursue a bilingual policy of education, that 6s. 5d. must be divided between English reading material and Welsh reading material.
That is not a satisfactory position, and I appeal to the Minister—and to the Parliamentary Secretary whom I believe is sympathetic on this point, as no doubt is the Minister—to see what can be done, not only to have special grants but to vary perhaps the application of the grants formula to the Welsh educational authorities, who have this added obligation of providing reading material in Welsh as well as in English.

6.14 p.m.

Mr. Raymond Gower: I shall not detain the House for more than a few moments. I can from my knowledge endorse so much of what has been ably said by the hon. Member for Cardiff, West (Mr. G. Thomas) and others. Doubtless the Minister is aware, or has noted, the fact that in Wales we tend to set even more store on education than perhaps some parts of England. I think that is true of Scotland, too, possibly due to the history of two countries relatively poor economically, with their populations tending to set a very great deal of importance on bettering the conditions of their children.
That may explain much of the history of education in both Wales and Scotland. In that respect, self-help, if I may so describe it, has featured largely in the historical development of education, and I ask the Minister whether in future, in economies necessitated beyond the present ones, the grants to which reference has been made should be the subject of economies last of all, for they enable so many of the products of our schools to go to universities. They should be the last things to be touched.
With regard to the schools plan, we shall never, in any part of the country, have complete satisfaction. It will be a very long time before anybody can say with any certainty that there are enough schools or teachers. I think that some of the trouble since the war in my own constituency in South Wales, as indeed in other parts of the country, has been due to the fact that, although the schools were planned and have been built, at the same time building development has occurred, with movements and increases of population, so that already some of those school buildings are somewhat inadequate for the neighbourhoods they have to serve. One can only hope that means may be improvised to tide us over that until such time as we can build additional schools.
In that respect, I wish to refer to some of the smaller village schools. It may be said with some justification that these schools are not always as satisfactory as the more modern and more spacious schools we are now erecting. Yet, as we are so terribly short of school buildings, it may be of some help and assistance to lengthen the life of some of these schools, some of which have been forced to close, just as a stop-gap, as it were, until we can afford all the spacious buildings we require.
With those few remarks, I endorse what has been said in this pleasant and non-controversial discussion. We all realise that the Minister's instructions have been by nature of a request rather than a dictate, and that any essential economies will be effected by the local authorities concerned with sense and in such a manner as not to affect the essential basic services at all.

6.23 p.m.

Mr. Cledwyn Hughes: We are extremely grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, West (Mr. G. Thomas) for introducing the subject of Welsh education this afternoon and giving us the opportunity of discussing it. Although he comes from the deep south and I come from the far north, we are at one in our love of education.
In the first place, I should like to follow what was said by my hon. Friend the Member for Caernarvon (Mr. G. Roberts) on the question of county grants. My experience as a member of a local education authority is that the present operation of these grants gives rise to a sense of


great frustration amongst students at our university colleges. Today, one sees a student from one county, having obtained two subjects at the advanced level—in what was formerly the higher certificate examination—without a grant from his county authority. He may come from poor circumstances. In the same university there may be a student with similar qualifications from another county, possibly in the same lodgings. Yet the second may be in receipt of a generous grant. That gives rise to a sense of frustration in the student and throughout the entire county from which he comes.
I do not know what the Minister can do about this matter, because I appreciate that she will be unwilling to interfere with that discretion which is the traditional right of local education authorities. However, if she could bring some benevolent pressure to bear on local education authorities in Wales, it would have a salutary effect throughout the Principality, and particularly among the students in our university colleges.
My second point is about school books. As the Minister is aware, at least in some parts of Wales we lay considerable stress on the importance of the Welsh language. Even in those areas where the Welsh language is not common currency—for example, the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, West—there is great sympathy with our aspirations in this direction. Possibly the Minister may be aware of that, and certainly the Joint Under-Secretary who is responsible for Welsh affairs should know of it.
Fifty years ago it was almost a major crime to speak the Welsh language in a primary school in Wales. The small boy who spoke the language in a primary school was severely caned by the headmaster. But circumstances have changed. We have made progress. Today we lay great emphasis on the importance of the Welsh language. In the county of Anglesey and other counties the Welsh language is given equal status, as indeed it should be, with the English language. Children are allowed to learn their mother tongue as a first language from the moment they enter school.
If children are to learn the Welsh language adequately, then schools must be provided with an adequacy of Welsh books. Today the situation is that they

do not receive sufficient Welsh books. This may result in a decline in the knowledge of the language. It is not an understatement to say that the schools of Wales are starved of Welsh books. This is not because Welsh publishers are unable to publish the books in Welsh, but because the present grants for schools are not adequate even to support the production of reprints. Of the £35, which is the average for England and Wales for educating each child in maintained primary and secondary schools, only 6s. 5d. is, on the average, available for the purchase of school hooks.
In Wales, after the heavy cost of English secondary and primary school books has been met out of this sum, the amount left for Welsh books is insufficient to sustain Welsh publishing. Not only do we have the problem of the insufficient supply of Welsh books, but we also have the accompanying problem of the Welsh publishing companies. They are in very deep waters these days.
The solution to this problem can only be in immediate action on the part of the education authorities. If the Minister will encourage the education authorities to supply a sufficiency of Welsh books to schools and give consideration to increased grants she will make an important contribution towards saving our language.
My third and last point is one which is not solely applicable to Wales. It is a problem common to all rural Britain. I refer to the question of transporting children to school. In the sparsely populated areas of Wales this problem is paramount. I have not decided how it can be solved, except possibly by a system of equalisation grants. For instance, the cost of transporting children to school in a City such as Cardiff or Liverpool is negligible compared with the cost in a rural constituency such as that of my hon. Friend the Member for Caernarvon or my own.
This gives rise to an inequitable state of affairs as between the urban and the rural areas. I hope that the Minister will look into this entire matter, because it places an unfair burden upon our rural areas. These are the three matters to which I should like the Minister to give her sympathetic consideration.

6.28 p.m.

Mr. T. W. Jones: I wish to confirm what has been said by previous speakers in this debate. I repeat that the people of Wales love education above all else. The most interesting story about the Principality is the one relating to the growth and establishment of the Welsh University. It was not established by wealthy patrons, as other universities have been established, but by the coppers of the poor miners and the quarrymen of North Wales. They went out on Saturday afternoons and collected penny by penny to enable them to establish the first college at Aberystwyth. We love education for education's sake.
I am glad to see present my right hon. Friend the Member for Gower (Mr. Grenfell). He possesses a miners' first-class certificate, but he had never any ambition to be a first-class manager in a pit. He qualified simply for the sake of qualifying. He studied for the sake of the study. I emphasise that we do that in Wales. What the right hon. Member did can easily be multiplied a hundredfold.
I implore the Minister not to economise by a single penny on education in Wales. There are many reasons for that. I will give one. The Prime Minister has established a new office. We now have a Minister for Welsh Affairs. I am sure that the Minister is anxious to make himself popular with our people. He can do that. I am glad to see that his deputy is present today. But it does not matter what that Minister does, however good he may be in other respects, if he lets us down on education, then down will go his popularity, too. Nothing is more certain than that.
Again, our schools are such that half of them should be treated as slums. In the country villages there are school buildings which are not even fit for animal habitation, let alone for children. We should remember that the child spends 12 years of his life in these buildings and the teacher spends about 50 years there. If there is to be economy, the classes will be increased in size. The Minister might say, "No, we will not allow that," but it can be done in most insidious ways.
I was a teacher some years ago, and I remember H.M. inspector of schools coming round about 1929, in the period following the Labour minority Govern-

ment. He went to the headmaster and said, "Jones, I see, has over 60 children in his class. That number must be reduced to below 50." The headmaster replied "I cannot do it. I have neither the buildings nor the staff." The inspector then said, "That is your pigeon, not mine, and when I come here again I want to see 49 on the register."
The inspector went away; what did the headmaster do? He took about a dozen of my children, and placed their names on another register, but left the children with me. I still had 60 children in my class, but had credit for only 49. I was worse off than I was before. I am sure that has been the game in many cases. There are, as the Minister will recognise, tricks in every trade, and even in every profession. I implore the Minister, so far as the Principality is concerned, not to reduce the allocation for the local education authorities of the 13 counties of Wales, whatever other economies are made.
One other point which I want to impress on the Minister, is that, apart from the region around Wrexham, technical education is unknown in North Wales. Children in these areas have no opportunity for getting technical education, and when jobs which demand technical skill and knowledge are available, we have to go across the border to get the people to fill them.
That is not good enough, because we have the brains and the raw material already there. Our children are as good as any others in Britain, and better than most, and I want those children to have the very best opportunities of education. So far as I can see, if the present Government remain in office for the next 10 years—and I hope to goodness they will not be there for more than 12 months—we shall have another generation of boys in North Wales totally deprived of this opportunity of receiving technical education. I appeal to the Minister that, whatever else she may do, she should not make economies in education so far as Wales is concerned.

6.33 p.m.

Mr. Tudor Watkins: You will have noticed, Mr. Speaker, that most Members of Parliament have been flustered by the Budget, but we who come from Wales never get


flustered; we try at all times to get together when there is something in which we all believe quite sincerely.
On this occasion, I am most grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, West (Mr. G. Thomas) for initiating this debate. I agree, of course, with what he says, but if had told us last night that he expected to rise just after five o'clock today to open this debate, I am sure that many of my colleagues would have prepared even greater speeches than those they have delivered. But already sufficient has been said to get the Welsh Department going full speed ahead for a long time, and perhaps the little additions that I propose to make will give them extra work still.
First of all, may I join with other hon. Members in imploring the Minister not to cut down anything to do with schools for handicapped children. A plea has already been made on behalf of spastic children, and when the Minister comes to the pleasant parts of mid-Wales round Llandrindod Wells in the summer time, I hope she will see the fine residential school for the deaf which has been provided by the Joint Education Committee for Wales. If that sort of thing can be done for deaf children, a similar project for spastic children would be a very good thing.
I am a member of a local education authority, and I must say that, if we were to take a lead from the majority of Welsh educational authorities, not a great deal would be cut in the education estimates for this year. I am very glad to find that there is to be an increase in the Estimate over last year, as announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer this afternoon. Therefore, in my opinion, although I know that the costs have gone up, there ought to be some indication given by the Minister this evening that any great project that is planned for the 1952–53 financial year will not be cut at all.
I know that Circular 245 and other instructions have been sent out, and that, as a result, in my own county of Brecon, a scheme to which some of us have looked forward for a very long time is to be slowed down and is not to be started in the next financial year at all. It is a grammar school for boys at Penlan in Brecon. Even the most ardent education-

ists in my county realise the present difficulties, but we all regret that this school has had to be put back.
I am also concerned with the other county which I represent—Radnorshire. I know that they got really frightened on education by Circular 242, and reduced their estimates by a 2½d. rate. I hope the Minister will look into these estimates very carefully, and see that the proper provision of education in that county is not touched at all. Cutting down an expenditure on school playgrounds is not real saving.
I have in Radnor the only authority in Wales which does not make the clothing grant for children attending at a primary or secondary schools. Surely this is bound to have a bad result on the children going to the schools. I hope that the Minister, by peaceful persuasion, will be able to convince that authority that, if there is a need for the clothing grant, they should make provision for it in their estimates and that the Minister has power to do that, as I am sure she will.
In Circular 245, there is some indication that, in regard to some minor projects, the capital expenditure shall not exceed a certain sum. I hope that some of these minor projects will not be cut down a great deal, when it comes to maintenance, repair and improvement of village schools which are not to be closed. Again, it is vital for the success of the schools meals service that consideration should be given to good sanitary arrangements and reliable water supplies.
I listened in Brecon the other day to the General Secretary of the National Union of Teachers giving an address on education, and he made a very strong point of the increased cost of stationery and equipment. It is vitally important, although the average man in the street does not realise it, to recognise how much these costs have gone up, and, again, I hope the Minister will look into the matter and see that sufficient material is available in that direction for all our schools.
Some people on my own local authority seem to have been bitten by the economy bug, and they seem to think that they can make a cut in the supply of plimsolls for children in primary schools who go in for physical training. I hope the Minister will examine such estimates when they come before her.
I would also join in the plea that has been made that greater consideration should be given to the subject of technical education because of the years of depression caused by only one type of industry in South Wales. We have been concerned only with the mining type of education, but now, with a diversity of industry, we require the provision of a great deal of technical education, and I hope the Minister will see that everything possible shall be done to encourage these schemes of development in technical education.
I was very glad to find that the Minister, in reply to Questions on two occasions recently, said that she was not in favour of closing village schools. During the period of office of the last Government, I was lucky enough to secure the Adjournment debate, although, rather different from the situation tonight, I had only half an hour in which to put my case. Nevertheless, I was satisfied with the result of that debate and a review was made of the question of closing village schools under the development plans.
I am sure that the Minister agrees that village schools ought not to be closed merely because some supra-educationists want to centralise everything. The village school is a great institution in Wales, as, I am sure, in other countries, too. I hope that the Minister, in view of her announcement to the House, will examine the proposals for the closing of village schools with a view to maintaining them wherever possible, and will not agree to their being closed merely because the education authority concerned asks that they should be closed. The views of the parents and objectors should be given due consideration. I trust that when objections are sent to the Minister, local education authorities will see that through their respective sub-committees every consideration is given to them.
As a general rule, such objections are not usually gone into in any detail. I ask the right hon. Lady to carry out the undertaking given to me on an Adjournment debate some years ago that parents and other objectors would have the opportunity to put forward their points of view. I warn the Minister that unless something is done about the matter in both Radnor and Breconshire, I shall

take the first opportunity to raise the matter on the Adjournment.
I know that the reply might be—what can one do with schools which have a roll of only 12, 14 or 20 pupils? I hope the Minister will not take the figures sent in years ago in connection with these development plans, but that she will examine them in the light of such new circumstances as rural depopulation and increased productivity in agriculture. In that respect, the village school is a great asset. I conclude by repeating that I am very glad my hon. Friend has had this opportunity of raising the subject of education in Wales tonight I hope the Under-Secretary responsible for Welsh Affairs will not go to his chief and say that because we have had this debate tonight we do not want another Welsh debate in the near future.

6.44 p.m.

Rev. Llywelyn Williams: I wish to refer to one matter which, so far, has not been mentioned in this debate—the very welcome appearance in the Principality during these last few years of Welsh schools. By that, I mean schools in which all the subjects are taught through the medium of the Welsh language. This is something completely new in the history of the Principality and is an innovation which I hope hon. Members on both sides of the House will warmly approve.
In many instances, these Welsh schools have been brought into being because of the desire of parents in many areas, who have, unfortunately, become Anglicised, that their children should become conversant with the Welsh language, with its intrinsic beauty and its richness. It is well known to all of us who have the future of Welsh education close at heart that in many instances these schools have become possible owing to the sacrifice made by the parents. In Swansea there is only one such school for a population of about 180,000. This means that extra travelling is incurred.
There is, of course, the problem of buildings. In many townships in Wales, chapel vestries are being used for this purpose. I appeal to the Minister to give every support possible to this wonderful feature in our Welsh educational life. I know that in the last analysis the preservation and continuation of the Welsh


language is a matter for the hearth, but the parents can be helped considerably by the education authorities in the setting up of these schools. I regard these Welsh schools as oases in an and desert.

6.47 p.m.

The Minister of Education (Miss Florence Horsbrugh): All those who have taken part in this debate tonight have congratulated the hon. Member for Cardiff, West (Mr. G. Thomas) on having got his debate so early on Budget day. They thought, perhaps, as I did, that hon. Members might continue to speak about the Budget. It would appear that they were so stunned by the glorious news that they felt it better to adjourn further discussion on the subject for today. This gave the House the opportunity to turn to education in Wales much earlier than was expected.
I would say at once that if there are any details about particular schools which I cannot give hon. Members at short notice tonight, I will make a point of letting them have them later. I was very anxious to have the opportunity of replying to this debate myself, because since I went to the Ministry I have made it a particular interest to look into the working of the Ministry of Education in Wales in order to get as much information as possible about the subject. I am not altogether a stranger to that part of the country, for when I was with the Ministry of Health during the war I went there several times. I shall always remember the kindness of the people of Wales to the evacuees who went into their homes.
As hon. Members know, I received a deputation and discussed with my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Home Affairs how we could make better arrangements for education in Wales. A statement was made at that time, but I have since carried the matter rather further. We have decided, as a matter of policy, that as much as possible of the work of the Welsh Department is to be transacted in Cardiff. We are going to retain the existing structure which provides for units of the Welsh Department in both London and Cardiff, but the Cardiff office will be responsible for day to day decisions. Consultations will normally take place at that office unless, as sometimes happens, people prefer to travel to London. The Cardiff office is to be given the necessary staff to undertake this work.

Mr. G. Thomas: Does the right hon. Lady's announcement mean that the permanent Secretary will now be stationed at Cardiff?

Miss Horsbrugh: If the hon. Gentleman will wait a moment I will try to give him a picture of the whole thing. The Department will continue to be the responsibility of the permanent Secretary for Wales who will retain his London office as his headquarters.
The Assistant Secretary will also remain in London and will have the part-time assistance of a Principal. All other staffs will be stationed at Cardiff and will refer to London as and when necessary. The Cardiff office is to be called the Welsh Office of the Ministry of Education. It will be the headquarters of the Welsh inspectorate and of the Welsh priority officer. The Chief Inspector of Schools for Wales will be designated the Welsh Officer. I cannot promise that we can make the transfer before some date in May or June.
As for the Permanent Secretary, I think that the best plan is for him to have headquarters in London and to be travelling to and from Cardiff; otherwise, the Minister who, after all, is the Minister of Education for England and Wales, would not be able to keep in touch, as he or she should, and the Permanent Secretary would not be able to keep in touch with general policy and special arrangements. I think the arrangements we have made should bring some satisfaction and that when hon. Members have seen it working they will regard it as an improvement.
The first of the main points brought up in this debate was the question of what economies will take place as a result of the issue of Circular 242. As hon. Members have heard before, and were reminded again by the Chancellor of the Exchequer today, that we are spending more on education this year than we have ever spent in the history of this country. We shall be spending at least £6 million more than we spent last year in England and Wales.
The strange thing is, whether we speak English or learn to speak Welsh, that in neither language is an increase in the amount of money proposed to be spent translated by the word "cut." I sometimes ask myself whether if, in years to come, a Government find it necessary to


spend less on education, that will be called an "increase."
We are to spend more than ever before. Do not let us forget that; we can be proud of it. I am as interested in education and in the great advantages of education as any hon. Member who has spoken in this debate. I think we can take a certain pride that in these times of desperate difficulty—and having heard the Chancellor today we should all realise that they are desperate—we in this country have taken the step, of which the whole world is aware, of placing a greater sum of money than ever before at the service of education.
It would be far better if we looked at the present position from that point of view. I agree that costs have gone up and that there are more children in schools. But we should not talk of cuts. Rather should we see what is the best value we can obtain from this extra money.
Hon. Members will agree that we have to look at primary, technical and secondary education and find out what is required. Having established that first priority, one has to go further and find out how much money can be spent on those requirements within the general arrangement.
Circular 242 asked local authorities to look again at the forecasts they had sent in last autumn. Those are fore-cases of the estimates they will be sending in next April. I think it is extremely difficult to put down estimates. One wants to be sure, especially if they are for a certain time ahead, that one is putting down enough. The forecasts we received in the autumn worked out at over £20 million more than we spent last year.
Since then some local authorities have said to me, "There is no need for you to send this circular. We always look at the estimates again and the cuts we are now making we would have made anyhow." I think there is a good deal in that and that when some local authorities look at the estimates and compare them with the forecasts, they do find that certain of their figures are too high.
The notice referring to 5 per cent. related to a target to be aimed at, and it was made perfectly clear that estimates

were not to damage the essential fabric of education. I am as convinced today as when I signed that circular that if I had not sent it a great many local authorities might not have looked at some of the details, and that some of the expenditure we want devoted to priority needs and want to be used so carefully might have been spent in ways which—

Mr. W. G. Cove: On a point of order. Could the Minister tell us how the Welsh authorities have responded to Circular 242?

Miss Horsbrugh: Is that a point of order?

Mr. Speaker: That is not a point of order.

Miss Horsbrugh: I am trying to reply to those hon. Members who have asked me questions. Hon. Members brought up various point about which they are very anxious. The hon. Member for Cardiff, West mentioned several points.
When I receive the estimates in April, I will see what changes the local authorities have made. In some cases I have been asked for advice on nursery schools, divisional executives and several other matters, and those local authorities who have asked for it have received my advice. On the subject of nursery schools, divisional executives and other things, we have said that we are not in favour of indiscriminate cutting down from the point of view of finance, but that each service should be examined to see if it was useful and necessary and what it cost.

Mr. G. Thomas: Is it not a fact, however, that the Minister has sent definite instructions and a circular to each authority concerning its building projects? She has not made any reference to that up to now. I presume that she is making a general statement.

Miss Horsbrugh: Perhaps I was going too slowly. I was anxious to give information in reply to questions asked about Circular 242. I have said that I am waiting to see the estimates when they come in April and I have said that we are not asking for indiscriminate cutting.
I said in that circular that there would be a further circular on the building programme, because until we found out the


amount of supplies and the exact state of the programmes of the authorities for 1951–52, it was not possible to make out a programme for the whole country. We had to wait to see what labour would be available, the amount of money we could spend and the exact state of the building programmes of the local authorities. We then issued Circular 245.
I have here a long list of various authorities. The hon. Member for Cardiff, West, mentioned certain authorities which, he said, had not been given a single projected new building. But they had none in their previous programme. I would prefer not to go into the details in relation to each authority by name, but I know that the hon. Member has no complaint to make in his own constituency.
We said in that circular—my predecessor worked out the plan—that we had to arrange to build in the areas where there was an increase in the school population and where there were also new housing estates where children would be coming to live and would be needing schools.

Mr. P. Morris: Will the right hon. Lady say whether she has considered the plight of a school completely destroyed by enemy action? Would that be a case for priority?

Miss Horsbrugh: What we had to see was that in each district there were school places for the school children who were there. They might have come into a new housing estate which had no school. That had to be a priority. There may have been an increase in the number of children in the area, due to the increased birthrate; so that there were more children to get into the school, in exactly the same way as if a school had been bombed and did not exist any more. There was a school population without a school.
But there are other things I should like to do. I should like to build schools to replace some of the old, bad schools, but my predecessor went ahead with the plan that I am on at this moment. Some years ago the previous Government quite clearly decided—probably when they decided to put up the school-leaving age—that the building would have to be concentrated on providing the extra school places. It was laid down in the plan, on which I am now working, that local authorities could not build simply for overcrowded

or black-listed schools, but they must concentrate on the extra school places.
I do not think we can possibly turn back on that. If we allowed the building of better schools or extra schools to replace the bad schools, either we would not have school places for the children coming into school, or we would have to change the school-leaving age. If we are to have children in that number we must build for them and we shall have to wait until the large population has been through the school before we say "We will replace the black-listed schools and make all these improvements."
I believe that those are facts, and it is on that plan that I have tried to proceed. It is quite clear that a good deal of the building programme of 1951–52 was not completed. What happened—and I am sure hon. Members must know this from their own constituencies—was that the building programme became completely overloaded. We were trying to do more than we could and we were getting delays. It is no good having too many schools started and not completed, because children cannot be taken into those. I could quote examples from all over the country where the programme had to be scaled down because of the difficulties. Last year I was told of programmes where the steel did not come along and where there was not enough labour.
The change in the programme in Wales as a whole—for the Principality—is very small indeed. If the hon. Member for Cardiff, West, wants to look at the figures as a whole, I will give them to him.

Mr. G. Thomas: I tried the other day to elucidate the facts, but the Minister was even more elusive on that question than on most.

Miss Horsbrugh: I am sorry if I was elusive. The week before I was told I was filibustering. Now I try to be quick and I am told that I am elusive. With practice I shall, perhaps, improve.

Mr. Thomas: Keep right on to the end of the road.

Miss Horsbrugh: I think Wales has done well. Some projects are being held back slightly, but it will not mean as much as another year. It will be a few months. Wales as a whole is doing very well with its programme.
I know the interest which the hon. Member for Cardiff, West, has taken in these spastic children, and this school at Glamorgan. I have gone into the matter very carefully. At the moment we have only reached the point at which Glamorgan are considering entering on negotiations for a site. It is obvious that they will not be ready to start work on the school. It will be an entirely new building and the planning of it will take some time. None of us has had experience of this project, and it is the first one in Wales. It is physically impossible for these plans to be ready and the site prepared in this year—1952–53—but we hope to get it into next year's programme—1953–54.

Mr. Thomas: The authority is disappointed that the Ministry has said it will not be included in this year's programme.

Miss Horsbrugh: We should have liked to be able to include it in this year's programme, but it is not possible. Negotiations have not yet taken place for the site and all the arrangements for the planning of this new building have to be made. If the hon. Member for Cardiff, West, looks into the matter, he will see that it will take some time before we can begin the building work; but I want to make it clear that there will not be a delay. I know the work he has done and we want to see them getting down to this building, but the plan is not ready and there will have to be negotiations for the site.
Technical school plans are, I believe, going ahead as quickly as possible. I do not think there has been any considerable delay. During this year we expect starts to be made with the new technical colleges at Ammanford and Llandaff, and the technical institute at Pybwyrlwd and accommodation for day release classes at Aberystwyth.

Mr. G. Roberts: Could the Minister tell us anything about the reference made by the hon. Member for Merioneth (Mr. T. W. Jones) to technical education in North Wales? She has got as far north as Aberystwyth and perhaps we could, entice her a little nearer to Caernarvon.

Miss Horsbrugh: If the hon. Gentleman will give me a little extra time to travel

north, I will do it. I have no information, but I will try to get it and let him have it.
The other problem was the subject of awards. I have heard of the difficulty in cases where the awards differed in amount and standard, where people living in one area thought they were not getting as fair a share as those in other areas. We have considered this and have sent to the local authorities to tell them to wait before arranging their awards, and we are going to give them certain infomation to enable them to discuss it. At present discussions are going on with local authorities and universities to come to a conclusion on the maintenance standard. That will be the maintenance standard for our State scholarships.
If we can get the local representatives working on that, we can tell the local authorities what standard we are setting for the State scholarship. We are having a table made of the different numbers of awards and amounts of awards in all authorities, in relation to the population who might have the chance of getting those awards. That is almost a visual aid in deciding the amount of awards and the standard. Having given them that information, we are going to ask them to discuss the matter with us, because I do agree that people should think they are getting the same chance whether they are in one part of the country or another.
I know that transport is a difficulty in certain areas. Again, I have to await the estimates which will be received in April. I have said—and I still stand by it—that I have asked local authorities to look at the various things on which perhaps too much is being spent. But it is for them to look at the amount they are spending and to justify it, and I will certainly look at the position when I receive the estimates.
The hon. Member for Cardiff, West, urged me to use my authority. I wonder whether he would like me to use my authority when he agrees with me but not when he disagrees with me. The other day, at Question time, I was asked to use my authority. A local authority wanted to shut down nursery schools. I was asked, "Will you do something about it?" I said, "Yes," and I told them they could not make indiscriminate cuts. Apparently that was excellent; I was using my authority, and I believe


hon. Members thought I was right in using it. I am, therefore, looking for their support after April when I have to use my authority to do what I think is right in asking local authorities to look at the figures they have sent in. I have to say that either they are spending too much or too little.
I have heard what was said about books, and I will look into the matter, and I will also look into the question of clothing. One hon. Member spoke about a school for deaf children. In one case, at any rate, we are getting an addition to the programme with a school particularly for children suffering from deafness. I think I have answered nearly all the points raised and I turn now to the last, that of the Welsh language.

Mr. Bowen: May I ask the hon. Lady, before she deals with this point, whether she has any information to give us about the proposed residential schools in Carmarthen, Cardigan and Merioneth for sub-normal children?

Miss Horsbrugh: No. I will look into that and I will tell the hon. Gentleman about it. I had a list of other schools about which I thought I might be asked, but I do not think that was included. I will find out and will let the hon. Gentleman know
I think hon. Members know that no Minister of Education for England and Wales would do other than try to help forward the teaching of the Welsh language. The difficulties of schools in which the whole of the teaching is in the Welsh language have been pointed out. I should need some good arguments to convert me to believe that it was right to—

Mr. G. Roberts: Between 1945 and 1950 I pressed this matter rather hard with the then Minister of Education, the right hon. Member for Farnworth (Mr. Tomlinson), and from being a voluntary matter, pressed by youth movements, particularly the Welsh League of Youth, it became an official part of the Minister's educational policy in Wales. If the Minister intends to question the value of these schools, she will be questioning a part of the educational policy in Wales

which has become established and official. I thought I ought to intervene before she went too far on this point.

Mr. T. W. Jones: I invite the Minister as soon as possible to visit one of these schools. She has carried us all with her up to the moment and it is a pity, when we are on the point of adjourning, that she should drop our support so suddenly. May I have her promise this evening that in the very near future, during the Parliamentary Recess if possible, she will visit one of these schools? She will find it extremely interesting.

Rev. LI. Williams: As the hon. Member who first referred to these Welsh schools, may I say that I think the Minister will find that the record of the first Welsh school established in Wales, at Llanelly, is very good? In competition with other schools, in which instruction is given in the English language, for entrance into the grammar schools, the Welsh school has the finest record during the last few years.

Miss Horsbrugh: I know that. I am only putting in a plea, at the end of the debate, that the children should also be able to learn English, as a foreign language if hon. Members like to put it that way. I want to make it clear that I know about these schools and—

Several Hon. Members: rose—

Miss Horsbrugh: I must push on. I know the necessity for more text-books in Welsh. I am not in the least opposed to this.
Perhaps it was a pity that at the end of the debate, closing on rather a lighter note, I should have disturbed hon. Members. I was about to say that I hope the people of Wales might also be allowed to learn the English language. [HON. MEMBERS: "They do!"] I have been serious the whole time, but just at the end I was introducing a lighter note. Plans have already been made for me to visit Wales. If I, as a Scot, can visit the people of Wales, we might make each other understand by speaking English.

Question put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Seventeen Minutes past Seven o'Clock.